Nichols v. Tractor Supply Company

Filing 38

ORDER granting in part plaintiff's motion to compel further discovery responses, document 24 . Order signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 7/26/2017. (Rooney, M)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 BRENNA NICHOLS, Plaintiff, 13 14 15 Case No. 1:16-cv-01768-LJO-EPG ORDER GRANTING IN PART MOTION TO COMPEL v. (ECF No. 24) TRACTOR SUPPLY COMPANY, 16 Defendant. 17 18 On June 21, 2017, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Compel bringing several discovery disputes 19 before the Court. (ECF No. 24) A motion hearing on the motion to compel was held on July 14, 20 2017, wherein the Court granted, in part, and denied, in part, the motion and provided specific 21 reasons on the record. (ECF No. 32) Formal ruling was reserved as to a final dispute as to 22 production of electronically stored information (ESI). (Id.) 23 As directed by the Court, the parties submitted written proposals to the Court as to the 24 appropriate scope of the required further production of ESI. (ECF Nos. 34, 36) The Court has 25 reviewed the proposals and for reasons provided on the record at the July 14, 2017 hearing, orders 26 as follows: 27 28 Plaintiff’s motion to compel (ECF No. 24) as to the production of ESI is GRANTED as follows: 1 1 1. Defendant will narrow the current review set of 4,894 documents as follows: (a) 2 eliminate all e-mails generated prior to February 1, 2013, (b) eliminate all e-mails generated after 3 October 23, 2016, (c) eliminate all e-mails which do not contain at least one of the following 4 search terms: 5 7 leave, absence*, Family Medical Leave Act, FMLA, California Family Rights Act, CFRA, accom*, permanent, temporary, lifting, receiver, position*, doctor*, appoint*, dr., restrict*, return, return to work, perform*, dut*, retal*, discrim*, unfair*, terminat* 8 2. 6 9 10 one or more of Requests for Production, and (b) privilege, attorney work-product and/or privacy/confidentiality issues. 3. 11 12 Documents which are identified as responsive and neither privileged nor attorney work-product must be produced by August 25, 2017.1 4. 13 14 Defendant will review the resulting review set documents for (a) responsiveness to Documents which are identified as responsive but either privileged or attorney work product will be identified on a privilege log, which shall be provided by August 25, 2017. 5. 15 By August 18, 2017, counsel for the parties shall meet and confer to resolve any 16 disputes regarding the handling of documents identified as responsive which raise 17 privacy/confidentiality issues. 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 20 Dated: July 26, 2017 /s/ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 If Defendant will have difficulty meeting the August 25 deadline, it should petition the Court for relief as soon as the difficulty becomes apparent. In any case, it should undertake a rolling production that will permit any previouslyset depositions to go forward as scheduled. 2

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?