Arias v. Ruan Transport Corporation
ORDER DISREGARDING JOINT STATEMENT OF DISCOVERY DISAGREEMENT. Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that the parties joint statement of discovery disagreement (ECF No. 52) is DISREGARDED unless and until the parties comply with the requirements of either Local Rule 251 or the Courts informal discovery process. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 4/20/2017. (Hernandez, M)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case No. 1:16-cv-00280-SAB
ORDER DISREGARDING JOINT
STATEMENT OF DISCOVERY
RUAN TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
(ECF No. 52)
On April 19, 2017, the parties filed a joint statement of discovery disagreement in which
18 Defendant seeks to compel Plaintiff to be produced for a second day of deposition testimony,
19 wherein Plaintiff complies with his notice of deposition and produces the categories of
20 information and documents described in his notice of deposition. (ECF No. 52.)
As the parties have previously been informed, there are two manners in which to have
22 discovery disputes resolved. The first is by a noticed motion as described in Local Rule 251.
23 Secondly, the parties may agree to participate in the informal discovery dispute process which
24 can be found at the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California’s website
25 (http://www.caed.uscourts.gov) under Judges; United States Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone
26 (SAB). In the area entitled “Case Management Procedures,” there is a link to “Discovery
27 Dispute Procedures.”
For a motion to compel, the Local Rules provide that a party may file and serve a notice
1 of motion and motion scheduling the hearing date on the appropriate calendar at least twenty-one
2 days from the date the notice and motion are filed and served. L.R. 251(a). To comply with
3 Local Rule 251, the parties are required to file a joint statement of the discovery dispute or an
4 affidavit pursuant to Rule 251(d) at least seven days prior to the hearing date. L.R. 251(a). “If
5 the notice of motion and motion are filed concurrently with the [j]oint [s]tatement, the motion
6 shall be placed on the next regularly scheduled calendar for the Magistrate Judge or Judge
7 hearing the motion at least seven (7) days thereafter.” L.R. 251(a).
Here, the parties have filed a joint statement re discovery disagreement. However,
9 Defendant did not file a notice of motion and motion. Therefore, the parties have not complied
10 with Local Rule 251.
To the extent that the parties are seeking an informal telephonic
11 conference regarding this discovery dispute, they have not complied with the requirements for an
12 informal telephonic conference regarding discovery disputes.
Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that the parties’ joint statement of discovery
14 disagreement (ECF No. 52) is DISREGARDED unless and until the parties comply with the
15 requirements of either Local Rule 251 or the Court’s informal discovery process.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
April 20, 2017
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?