FA ND Chev, LLC et al v. Kupper et al

- 1 -
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA
FA ND Chev, LLC, and
FA ND Sub, LLC,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
Robert Kupper et al.,
Defendants.
BAPTKO, Inc.,
Plaintiff and
Counterclaim Defendant,
vs.
Foundation Automotive Corp. et al.,
Defendants and
Counterclaimants.
Case No. 1:20-cv-00138
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
[¶ 1] 	THIS MATTER comes before this Court on a Report and Recommendation filed by
United States Magistrate Judge Clare R. Hochhalter on February 11, 2026. Doc. No. 642.
Magistrate Judge Hochhalter recommends Kupper Parties’ Motion to Compel Discovery, For
Sanctions, and For Expedited Decision (Doc. No. 552) be granted, in part, and the Motion to Use
Documents and Information Obtained in Post-Judgment Discovery (Doc. No. 590) be granted. The
Foundation Parties’ motion to Enforce Protective Order (Doc. No. 602) be denied, and their
Case 1:20-cv-00138-DMT-CRH Document 645 Filed 02/23/26 Page 1 of 3

- 2 -
Motino for Attorney’s Fees and to Stay Pending appeal (Doc. No. 604) be granted, in part. Both
Parties filed Objections on February 18, 2026. Doc. Nos. 643–44.
[¶ 2] 	After a review of the entire record, the Court finds the Report and Recommendation to be
persuasive and does not find the objections persuasive. Kupper Parties’ objections regarding
sanctions do not consider the entirety of the case, which has been complex from the start. See, e.g.,
Doc. No. 170 (noting that Kupper Parties are partly to blame for choosing to file a separate lawsuit
instead of bringing up the issue in the same case). Foundation Parties restate the arguments made
before the Magistrate Judge. Both consolidated cases are from the same set of circumstances, and
the Foundation Parties chose to litigate and subject themselves to discovery. Therefore, the date of
the start of their lawsuit is appropriate. As to the contention that they have already provided the
desired information, Foundation seems to think that once the money was paid to the secured
interest (which was held by another Foundation entity), Kupper Parties’ right to discovery
disappeared. As Mr. Schaffer admitted in October, Foundation Parties have not disclosed what is
required to be disclosed. Doc. No. 642, p. 13.
[¶ 3] 	Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation its entirety. Kupper
Parties’ Motion to Compel Discovery (Doc. No. 552) is GRANTED. The Court orders Foundation
Parties to submit all substantive responses and documents to Kupper Parties’ requests from July
31, 2020, to the present within seven (7) days from the date of this Order. Foundation Parties may
provide objections but are required to substantively respond. Kupper Parties’ Motion to Expedite
(Doc. No. 552) is found as MOOT and the Motion for Sanctions (Doc. No. 552) is DENIED.
However, this Court notes the extensive discovery problems in this case, both before trial and post-
judgment. If the parties continue to raise the same arguments that Magistrate Judge Hochhalter has
already addressed multiple times, the issue of sanctions may have a different result.
Case 1:20-cv-00138-DMT-CRH Document 645 Filed 02/23/26 Page 2 of 3

- 3 -
[¶ 4] 	The Motion to Use Documents (Doc. No. 590) is GRANTED. The Protective Order is
extended for use in the state court proceedings and the list of individuals to whom information
may be disclosed shall be expanded to include all counterparts during the North Dakota and Texas
state court proceedings. The state court counterparts shall be dictated by the list on pages 5–6 at
paragraph 18 of the Amended Protective Order. See Doc. No. 275, pp. 5–6.
[¶ 5] 	Foundation Parties’ Motion to Enforce Amended Protective Order (Doc. No. 602) is
DENIED, Motion to Attorney Fees (Doc. No. 604) is DENIED, and Motion to Stay Pending
Appeal (Doc. No. 604) is GRANTED, in part. The Court orders as follows:
 	The Defendants shall deposit $5,139,981.90 with the Clerk of Court in accordance with
Local General Rule 1.10(A)(2) and (B)(2) for deposit in the Court Registry Investment
System (“CRIS”). The check shall be made payable to the United States District Court and
must be forwarded to the Fargo Clerk’s Office at:
o 	United States District Court
Clerk of Court
655 1st Avenue North, Suite 130
Fargo, North Dakota 58102-4932.
 	The custodian of the CRIS is authorized to deduct the applicable fees and taxes, without
further order of the Court.
 	The funds shall be held in CRIS until further order of this Court.
 	Upon deposit of the bond, the Order and Judgment shall be STAYED pending appeal.
[¶ 6] 	IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated February 23, 2026.
Daniel M. Traynor, District Judge
United States District Court
Case 1:20-cv-00138-DMT-CRH Document 645 Filed 02/23/26 Page 3 of 3