states as follows: 1 The time to answer the remaining allegations of the complaint is tolled pending the Court's ruling on the present motion. See Beaulieu v. Ed. of Trustees of Univ. of W. Fla., No. 3:07cv30/RV/EMT, 2007 WL 2020161, * 2 (N.D. Fla. July 9, 2007) (holding that defendant's patiial motion

protect the witness. Indeed, cases construing Rule 30(a)(2)(B) concern protection of the deponent from, for example, undue burden or harassment.” Beaulieu v. Bd. of Trustees, 2007 WL 4468704 (N.D. Fla. 2007). See also Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(2)(C)(i) (directing the court to limit the frequency or extent of

oversies." Elend v. Basham, 471 F.3d 1199, 1204-05 (11th Cir. 2006). "'The ripeness doctrine keeps federal courts from deciding cases prematurely,' Beaulieu v. City of Alabaster, 454 F.3d 1219, 1227 (11th Cir. 2006), and `protects [them] from engaging in speculation or wasting their resources through the