Jackson et al v. State of California et al

Filing 52

ORDER for Counsel to Meet and Confer Re Rule 26(f) Conference signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 05/29/2014. Telephonic Hearing set for 7/11/2014 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 9 (SAB) before Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone.(Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ARTHUR DUANE JACKSON, et al.,

12
13
14

Plaintiffs,
v.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

15
16

Defendants.
COREY LAMAR SMITH, et al.,

17
18
19

Case No. 1:13-cv-01055-LJO-SAB

Case No. 1:14-cv-00060-LJO-SAB

Plaintiffs,
v.
ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, et al.,

20

Defendants.

21

FREDERICK BEAGLE, et al.,

22
23
24
25

Case No. 1:14-cv-00430- LJO-SAB

Plaintiffs,
ORDER FOR COUNSEL TO MEET AND
CONFER RE RULE 26(f) CONFERENCE

v.
ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, et al.,
Defendants.

26
27
On May 28, 2014, the Court conducted an informal telephonic conference to address a
28
1

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

discovery disp between the parties in Smith v. Schwarzene
pute
n
egger, 1:14-cv-00060-SA
AB-LJO and
d
Be
eagle v. Schw
warzenegger 1:14-cv-00
r,
0430-SAB-L
LJO. Couns for Jackso v. State o California
sel
on
of
a,
1:13-cv-01055
50-LJO-SAB also appea
B
ared telepho
onically at th conferenc As discu
he
ce.
ussed during
g
the hearing, the parties to all three actions shal confer by June 23, 2
e
o
a
ll
y
2014 for the purpose of
e
de
eveloping a plan as to ho discovery will be con
p
ow
y
nducted in th
hese actions The partie shall file a
s.
es
joi discovery plan and, if necessary, each side m file a thr page brie on any dis
int
y
i
,
may
ree
ef
sputed issues
by July 8, 2014. A telep
y
phonic heari to addre ss the disco
ing
overy plan sh be held on July 11
hall
d
1,
20 at 10:00 a.m. The parties are to call the tol
014
0
p
o
ll-free teleco
onference nu
umber of (87 336-1280
77)
0
to appear at th hearing. The parties may contact Courtroom Deputy Mam Hernand to obtain
he
T
m
t
mie
dez
n
the teleconfere
e
ence code fo the call if needed.
or
n
The pa
arties are adv
vised that th order doe not change the curren status of d
his
es
nt
discovery and
d
at this time discovery is not open in these actions The plan to be addres
n
s.
ssed by the p
parties is no
ot
to set specific dates at this time, but to develop a c
s
o
coordinated approach as to how the discovery in
s
n
the actions will proceed in the futur The plan should adeq
ese
w
d
re.
n
quately reco
ognize the in
nterests of the
e
pa
arties, a redu
uction in the costs of liti
igation, and the most eff
fficient mean by which discovery in
ns
n
the cases will be appro
ese
w
oached as currently situ
c
uated. Furt
ther, the pla should c
an
consider how
w
discovery will be approac
l
ched when, and if, future parties are added not o
a
e
only in these cases but in
e
n
ubsequently filed cases in
f
nvolving the core issues presented in these cases
e
n
s.
su

19
20
21

IT IS SO ORD
T
DERED.
Dated:

May 29, 2014
2
U
UNITED ST
TATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
E

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2