Orozco, et al. v. Illinois Tool Works, Inc.

Filing 31

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 11/3/15 GRANTING in part and DENYING in part Plaintiffs' MOTION TO COMPEL Further Responses to Discovery Requests 25 . Plaintiffs' request for further responses to Plaintiffs' sp ecial interrogatories nos. 10-13 and requests for production nos. 9 and 11 is DENIED. Defendant's objections in regards to the appearance of Defendants 30(b)(6) witness for deposition are overruled. Defendant's designated witness(es) is to appear by 12/15/15. Defendant's objections as to deposition topics 2, 7, 8, and 10 only are SUSTAINED. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

JUAN OROZCO and JUAN OROZCOBRISENO, individuals, on behalf of
12 themselves and on behalf of all persons
similarly situated,
11

13

Plaintiff,
14

vs.
15
16

ILLINOIS TOOL WORKS, INC., a
Corporation, and Does 1 through 50,
inclusive,

Case No. 14-CV-02113-MCE-EFB
(Class Action)
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING IN
PART AND DENYING IN PART
PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL
FURTHER RESPONSES TO
DISCOVERY REQUESTS

17

Defendants.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
14cv2113.oah.1103
.doc

Case No. 14-CV-02113-MCE-EFB
[PROPOSED] ORDER

The Court, having considered the briefing of the Parties and having heard the

1
2
3

arguments of counsel, HEREBY ORDERS the following:
1. Regarding Plaintiffs’ request for production nos. 12 and 13, within two (2) weeks of

4

this Order, Defendant shall produce all of Defendant’s policies regarding meal and

5

rest periods relating to all non-exempt hourly employees employed by Defendant in

6

California between March 27, 2010 through the present.

7

2. Regarding Plaintiffs request for production nos. 2 and 4, within two (2) weeks of this

8

Order, Defendant shall produce Plaintiffs’ daily time and wage data – i.e., the

9

information that was used to calculate Plaintiffs’ wages and used to generate

10

Plaintiffs’ itemized wage statements and corresponding paychecks – in the electronic

11

Excel format in which the documents are ordinarily maintained. To the extent no

12

such responsive documents exist, defendant shall provide a verified certification,

13

completed by an individual with personal knowledge, stating the no such documents

14

exist.

15

3. Regarding Plaintiffs’ request for production no. 3, within two (2) weeks of this

16

Order, Defendant shall produce Plaintiffs’ itemized wage statements in the form in

17

which they were issued to Plaintiffs at the time of the issuance of their

18

corresponding paychecks.

19

4. Regarding Plaintiffs’ special interrogatory no. 6 and request for production no. 8,

20

Plaintiffs’ request for the names, dates of employment, last known telephone

21

numbers, last known addresses and last known email addresses of every putative

22

class member in an electronic, Microsoft Excel spreadsheet subject to a stipulated

23

protective order is DENIED without prejudice.

24

5. Plaintiffs’ request for further responses to Plaintiffs’ special interrogatories nos. 10-

25

13 and requests for production nos. 9 and 11is DENIED.

26 /////
27 /////
28 /////
14cv2113.oah.1103
.doc

Case No. 14-CV-02113-MCE-EFB
[PROPOSED] ORDER

1

6. Defendant’s objections in regards to the appearance of Defendant’s 30(b)(6) witness

2

for deposition are overruled. Defendant’s designated witness(es) is to appear by

3

December 15, 2015. Defendant’s objections as to deposition topics 2, 7, 8, and 10

4

only are SUSTAINED.

5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7
8
9

DATED: November 3, 2015.

____________________________________
HONORABLE Edmund F. Brennan
United States Magistrate Judge

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
14cv2113.oah.1103
.doc

Case No. 14-CV-02113-MCE-EFB
[PROPOSED] ORDER