Morgan Hill Concerned Parents Association v. California Department of Education

Filing 317

ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 07/25/17 ORDERING that the court VACATES its 302 order requiring CDE to pay $2362.50 for those services. The Special Master is DIRECTED to submit a renewed preliminary invoice, as required by step (1) in the process outlined in this order, for the $2362.50 for services rendered between 11/11/15-12/22/15. After he does so, the remaining steps and deadlines outlined in the order will apply: the parties will have 14 days to file any objections; the Special Master will have 30 days to file a final invoice and a response to any objections; and the parties will have 14 days to file any objections to the final invoice. All filings should be made under seal as outlined in the order. (Benson, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14

MORGAN HILL CONCERNED
PARENTS ASSOCIATION, an
unincorporated association, and
CONCERNED PARENTS
ASSOCIATION, an unincorporated
association,

17
18

ORDER

Plaintiffs,

15
16

No. 2:11-CV-03471-KJM-AC

v.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION, and DOES 1 through 5,
Defendant.

19
20

The California Department of Education (CDE) has filed in camera a request for

21

reconsideration of the court’s order adopting the Special Master’s fees for services rendered

22

between November 11, 2015 and December 22, 2015. See Not. of Req., ECF No. 309; Am.

23

Order, ECF No. 302. CDE seeks reconsideration on grounds that the court did not consider its

24

objections, also filed in camera, to the Special Master’s invoice. CDE is correct that, due to the

25

court’s prior lack of a good system for matching e-mailed objections to documents objected to,

26

the court did not consider its in camera objections. See Am. Order at 1:23–25. In order to

27

prevent such errors in the future, and to otherwise create a more streamlined and transparent

28
1

1

process for review of the Special Master’s invoices for services, the court here sets forth a process

2

that will apply to the pending and all future fee requests.

3
4

Effective immediately, before the court approves the Special Master’s fees, the
parties and Special Master will engage in the following four-step process:

5

(1) The Special Master will submit to the court for filing under seal, and serve on

6

the parties, preliminary invoices apportioning fees between the parties as

7

required by the court’s previous order. To have filings placed immediately

8

under seal by the clerk’s office, the Special Master (or parties) must e-mail the

9

filings to [e-mail].

10

(2) The parties will have fourteen (14) days to submit to the court for filing under

11

seal any objections to the draft invoices, using the process outlined above, with

12

service on the Special Master.

13

(3) The Special Master will have thirty (30) days to submit to the court for filing

14

under seal his final invoices and a written response to any party’s objections,

15

using the process outlined above, with service on the parties. The Special

16

Master may respond to any objections as he sees fit.

17

(4) The parties will have fourteen (14) days to submit to the court for filing under

18

seal any objections to the updated invoices prior to the court’s review, using

19

the process outlined above. The parties may only present the court with

20

objections they have raised with the Special Master.

21

After the parties have completed this process in full, the matter of payment of the invoices will

22

then be submitted to the court for review, and, as appropriate, issuance of an order for payment of

23

the final invoices.

24

Given the lengthy and contentious history of this case, the court renews its

25

cautionary admonishment that this new procedure “does not provide for attempting to impugn the

26

Special Master through direct communication with him.” See ECF No. 170 at 2. The parties are

27

both reminded that “[a] special master is a ‘surrogate’ of the court and in that sense the service

28

performed is an important public duty of high order in much the same way as is serving in the
2

1

Judiciary.” Id. (citing Cordoza v. Pac. States Steel Corp., 320 F.3d 989, 995 (9th Cir. 2003)).

2

Any end runs around the orderly procedure for reimbursement of the Special Master, refined here,

3

shall be addressed through appropriate sanctions. Similarly, any party may be subject to

4

sanctions for making frivolous objections at any stage of this process.

5

This updated process will facilitate resolution of the CDE’s objections to the

6

Special Master’s fees for services rendered between November 11, 2015 and December 22, 2015.

7

Accordingly, the court VACATES its order requiring CDE to pay $2362.50 for those services.

8

See Am. Order.1 The Special Master is directed to submit a renewed preliminary invoice, as

9

required by step (1) in the process outlined above, for the $2362.50 for services rendered between

10

November 11, 2015 and December 22, 2015. After he does so, the remaining steps and deadlines

11

outlined above will apply: (2) the parties will have fourteen (14) days to file any objections;

12

(3) the Special Master will have thirty (30) days to file a final invoice and a response to any

13

objections; and (4) the parties will have fourteen (14) days to file any objections to the final

14

invoice. All filings should be made under seal as outlined above.

15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: July 25, 2017.

17
18

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

Plaintiffs filed no objections to the Special Master’s invoice requiring them to pay $700
and already paid that amount without being ordered to do so. See ECF 302 at 1–2.
3