Ransom v. Herrera et al

Filing 174

ORDER GRANTING IN PART California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation's Request for an Extension of Time to Serve Responses to Plaintiff's Subpoena Duces Tecum 171 , signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 6/14/2018. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10
11

LEONARD RANSOM, JR.,

12
13

v.

14
15

DANNY HERRERA and RICKY
BRANNUM,

Case No. 1:11-cv-01709-LJO-EPG (PC)
Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING IN PART
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS AND
REHABILITATION’S REQUEST FOR AN
EXTENSION OF TIME TO SERVE
RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF’S
SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM
Defendants. (ECF NO. 171)

16
17
18

On June 13, 2018, non-party California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

19

(“CDCR”) filed a request for a thirty-day extension of time to serve Plaintiff with its responses to

20

a portion of Plaintiff’s subpoena requests. (ECF No. 171).

21

CDCR needs more time because, while it has compiled all non-electronically stored

22

responsive documents, responding to Plaintiff’s electronic discovery requests is a complex and

23

time-consuming process.

24

The Court finds good cause to grant CDCR’s motion. However, the Court will only grant

25

the motion in part. CDCR requests it be given until July 18, 2018, to serve Plaintiff with the

26

responsive electronically stored documents. There is a settlement conference set for July 17,

27

2018. (ECF No. 138). As the documents may be relevant for settlement purposes, the Court will

28

require that they be served on Plaintiff prior to the settlement conference, no later than July 12,
1

1

2018. The production may be served on Plaintiff’s limited purpose counsel, Brian McComas, in

2

an electronic format in order to facilitate the most efficient delivery.

3

If despite its best efforts, CDCR cannot fully comply with production before the settlement

4

conference, it may move for a further extension of time. However, it should strive to complete or

5

substantially complete production prior to July 12, 2018. Any further request for extension of

6

time shall include CDCR’s efforts to substantially comply by this deadline.

7

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that CDCR has until July 12, 2018, to serve

8

Plaintiff with any electronically-stored documents responsive to the second category of

9

documents that it was ordered by the Court to produce (ECF No. 151, p. 6). As discussed at the

10

discovery conference on June 13, 2018, CDCR may comply with the service deadline by serving

11

the documents electronically on Plaintiff’s limited purpose counsel on or before July 12, 2018.

12
13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

June 14, 2018

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2