Paula Gordon v. Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc., et al.

Filing 76

ORDER AFTER INFORMAL TELEPHONIC CONFERENCE RE DISCOVERY DISPUTE. Order signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 12/18/2018. (Timken, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

PAULA GORDON,
Plaintiff,

12
v.

13
14

NEXSTAR BROADCASTING, INC., et al.,
Defendants.

15
16

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:18-cv-0007 - DAD - JLT
ORDER AFTER INFORMAL TELEPHONIC
CONFERENCE RE DISCOVERY DISPUTE
(Doc. 74)

The plaintiff claims she suffered sexual harassment by defendant Mendoza while employed by

17
18

Nexstar. The parties agree the defendants may image the plaintiff’s cell phone related to texts sent and

19

received by the plaintiff (related to certain specified people). The dispute concerns two, sexually

20

explicit images1 Mr. Mendoza claims that the plaintiff showed to him and/or allowed him to see and

21

which were contained on the plaintiff’s cell phone. At the conference, the attorneys agreed as to the

22

scope of the discovery of the plaintiff’s cell phone related to two, specific images. As to these images2,

23

the Court ORDERS:

24
25
26

1

The Court uses this term loosely to encompass still and video images.
They will proceed as they have previously agreed related to the texts (which includes production of any attachments to
the relevant text messages) except that the plaintiff will produce an image of the phone, rather than the phone itself. If the
IT vendor finds the image produced by the plaintiff to be defective in any fashion, counsel SHALL meet and confer to
determine how to resolve the issue. The likely outcome will be that the plaintiff will produce the actual phone at a time
and place agreed upon to allow the IT vendor to image the phone.
2

27
28

1

1.

1

The IT vendor may search the phone for the two images at issue3 existing on the phone

2

from August 2013 to July 2016. The first image at issue purportedly depicts the plaintiff topless and

3

the second depicts the plaintiff performing oral sex on a man. If the IT vendor locates either image or

4

locates images believed to be either image, the vendor SHALL produce these images only to the

5

plaintiff’s attorney for a “first look.”4 These images SHALL NOT be produced or shown to defense

6

counsel by the IT vendor;
2.

7

After reviewing the images collected, if any, plaintiff’s counsel SHALL determine

8

whether any image is responsive and, if so, SHALL produce them within a reasonable time. If counsel

9

cannot determine whether the images are responsive, he may request the Court conduct an in camera

10

review of the images.

11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13

Dated:

December 18, 2018

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
3

28

See footnote 1.
The procedure set forth in the parties’ stipulation more fully describes this process. The Court does not intend to usurp
that description here in any fashion.
4

2