Bell v. United States Department of Interior et al

Filing 105

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 8/2/13: Defendants' oppositions, or non-oppositions, to plaintiff's amended motion for protective order 100 and amended motion to quash 101 are due no later than August 5, 2013. Plaintiff shall be permitted to reply during oral argument on August 7, 2013. Plaintiff's oppositions, or non-oppositions, to defendants' motion to compel independent medical examination 102 and motion for protective order 103 are due no later than August 5, 2013. Defendants shall be permitted to reply during oral argument on August 7, 2013. (Kaminski, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10
YOLANDA YVETTE BELL,

No. 2:12-cv-01414 TLN JFM (PS)

11
Plaintiff,

ORDER

12
v.
13
14

UNITED STATES DEP’T OF INTERIOR,
KENNETH SALAZAR, Secretary,
Defendants.

15
16

The following motions are presently calendared for hearing on August 7, 2013: plaintiff’s

17
18

motion to quash, second motion to quash, and amended motion to quash (ECF Nos. 86, 87 and

19

101), plaintiff’s motion for protective order and amended motion for protective order (ECF Nos.

20

96 and 100), defendants’ motion to compel independent medical examination (ECF No. 102) and

21

defendants’ motion for protective order (ECF No. 103).

22

The court notes that the parties’ most recent motions, ECF Nos. 100-103, do not comply

23

with the Local Rules that require scheduling a hearing at least twenty-one days from the date of

24

filing, or fourteen days from the date of filing when applicable. L.R. 251. Nevertheless, the court

25

is mindful that judicial efficiency is best served by hearing the parties’ motions concurrently, and

26

will therefore not vacate the August 7, 2013, hearing. The parties will be ordered to submit

27

oppositions or non-oppositions to these motions no later than August 5, 2013.

28

/////
1

1
2
3

Additionally, given plaintiff’s recent request to seal documents, the court notes that
plaintiff failed to comply with Local Rule 140 and properly redact1 the following exhibits in her
most recent motions: ECF No. 96-8 at 1, 6-8, 12-13; ECF No. 96-13 at 1, 5-6; ECF No. 100-9 at

4
5, 11, 15-16, 18, 22-23, 25, 29-30, 32, 36-37, 39, 43-44; ECF No. 100-12 at 1, 5-6; ECF No. 1005
6

17 at 3-5, 9; ECF No. 100-18 at 3-5, 9; ECF No. 101-5 at 5, 11, 15-16, 18, 22-23, 25, 29-30, 32,

7

36-37, 39, 44. The court will not sua sponte seal these documents.2 However, plaintiff will be

8

permitted to file a request to re-file partially redacted versions of these exhibits in accordance

9

with the Local Rules.

10
11

Both parties are cautioned that future failure to abide by the court’s Local Rules and the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure “may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all

12
13
14

sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court.” L.R. 110,
183(a).

15

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

16

1. Defendants’ oppositions, or non-oppositions, to plaintiff’s amended motion for

17

protective order (ECF No. 100) and amended motion to quash (ECF No. 101) are due

18

no later than August 5, 2013. Plaintiff shall be permitted to reply during oral

19
argument on August 7, 2013; and
20
2. Plaintiff’s oppositions, or non-oppositions, to defendants’ motion to compel

21

independent medical examination (ECF No. 102) and motion for protective order

22
23
24

1

25

The court notes that plaintiff attempted to redact some of these exhibits. However, the
redactions are not permanent and will reveal plaintiff’s personal data identifiers if a party were to
delete the redactions using the Adobe Acrobat’s delete function.

26

2

27
28

See L.R. 140(e) (“Neither the Clerk nor the Court will review filed documents for compliance
with privacy or other protective law, nor will the Court as a matter of course seal on its own
motion documents containing personal data identifiers, or redact documents, whether filed
electronically or on paper. No procedure set forth herein will excuse a violation of privacy or
other law by counsel or party.”).
2

1

(ECF No. 103) are due no later than August 5, 2013. Defendants

2

shall be permitted to reply during oral argument on August 7, 2013.

3
4

DATED: August 2, 2013.

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3