Hellmann-Blumberg v. University of the Pacific

Filing 25

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 2/5/2013 ORDERING that if counsel is unable to file a stipulation and proposed protective order, plaintiff's counsel may file a notice of motion and motion for a protective order. If this matter must be resolved by the court on a noticed motion and the court determines that either party was unreasonable in failing to reach a stipulated protective order as previously directed, sanctions will be imposed. (Zignago, K.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

UTHA HELLMANN-BLUMBERG,

11

Plaintiff,

12
13

No. 2:12-cv-0286 GEB DAD

v.
UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC, a
California Corporation,

ORDER

14
15

Defendant.

16

/

17

On January 31, 2013, plaintiff’s counsel filed a letter with the court, addressed to

18

the undersigned, seeking “guidance” regarding an apparent dispute among counsel for the parties

19

regarding the terms of a proposed stipulated protective order. It appears that counsel have been

20

unable to agree to the terms of a proper protective order to govern discovery produced in this

21

action despite the court’s prior direction to them that they do so. Nonetheless, the court does not

22

offer “guidance” to lawyers.

23

It would be unfortunate if counsel cannot resolve their differences over this

24

routine matter so that they are able to submit a proposed stipulated protective order that complies

25

/////

26

/////
1

1

with the Local Rules of this court.1 However, if they are unable to do so, plaintiff’s counsel may

2

file a notice of motion and motion for a protective order. If he elects to pursue this course,

3

plaintiff’s counsel is directed to consult the Local Rules, specifically Local Rule 141.1(b) and

4

Local Rule 251.2 If this matter must be resolved by the court on a noticed motion and the court

5

determines that either party was unreasonable in failing to reach a stipulated protective order as

6

previously directed, sanctions will be imposed.

7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: February 5, 2013.

9
10
11
12

DAD:6
Ddad1\orders.civil\hellmann0286.letter.ord

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

1

The court is unable to determine from the letter submitted by plaintiff’s counsel and the
attachment thereto the nature of the parties’ dispute regarding the terms of the stipulated
protective order. If both counsel agree that a brief telephonic conference with the court regarding
that dispute would resolve the matter, counsel may jointly contact Courtroom Deputy Pete Buzo
at [phone] to arrange such a telephonic conference. However, the court will proceed in
that manner only at the request of counsel for both parties.

24
2

25
26

In light of the pending deadline for compliance with the court’s January 14, 2013
discovery order, (Doc. No. 21), the parties are directed to Local Rule 144(e) concerning the
shortening of time. Although the undersigned may entertain an order shortening time, under all
circumstances the court expects clear and concise briefing in advance of any and all hearings.
2