Correct. But let's assume it plays (had played) out.
1) Rosen files a motion to quash - immediately stopping today's TPS 30(b)(6) until this motion could be heard.
2) TPS files a counter to that (objection)
3) Hearing would be at the next Omnibus on 7/28
4) TPS would need to file a "Motion to Shorten" in order for them to get their 30(b)(6) done before the confirmation
In due logic -- would you think that THJMW -- given her stated stance on 'late filed depositions' -- would do all of the following -- all would be required:
a) Approve the "Motion to Shorten" and hold an emergency hearing -- sometime before confirmation beginning on 7/13.
b) In that hearing, approve TPS's motion for a 30(b)(6)
c) Allow for TPS to hold their 30(b)(6) before confirmation
d) OR - Allow for potential (likely) delay of confirmation so that the 30(b)(6) could be done by TPS.
My conclusion is no. TPS effectively had scheduled their 30(b)(6) for today, and in the last hearing, the judge effectively neutered that due to the way it would have had to play out.
...Catz