Awadan et al v. Reebok Corporate Headquarter

Filing 44

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 8/23/2019 REOPENING the discovery period in this case until 10/4/2019, for the limited purpose of considering the motion to compel and, if ordered, conducting plaintiff's deposition; Defendant's 43 Motion to Compel is DENIED without prejudice to its renewal following satisfaction of the meet-and-confer requirements under the Local Rules; and The hearing set for 9/11/2019 is VACATED. (York, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SHAINAZ AWADAN,

12

No. 2:17-cv-01148-KJM-AC (PS)

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

ORDER

REEBOK CORPORATE
HEADQUARTER, a/k/a REEBOK
INTERNATIONAL LTD.,

15
16

Defendant.

17
This matter is before the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). On August 20,

18
19

2019, defendant filed a motion to compel plaintiff’s deposition, with a noticed hearing date of

20

September 11, 2019. ECF No. 43. Discovery in this matter was to be completed by January 11,

21

2019.1 ECF No. 30. Therefore, the court construes defendant’s motion as also seeking to modify

22

the scheduling order to reopen discovery. The court finds it appropriate to reopen discovery in

23

this case until October 4, 2019 (the date of the pre-trial conference before the assigned District

24

Judge), for the limited purpose of considering the motion to compel and, if ordered, conducting

25
26
27
28

1

The court’s pre-trial scheduling order specified that “‘completed’ means that all discovery shall
have been conducted so that all depositions have been taken and any disputes relative to
discovery shall have been resolved by appropriate order if necessary and, where discovery has
been ordered, the order has been complied with.” ECF No. 30 at 2. Further, all motions to
compel discovery were to be heard no later than December 19, 2018. Id.
1

1

plaintiff’s deposition.

2

Nevertheless, the court will deny without prejudice defendant’s motion to compel for

3

failure to comply with the Local Rules governing discovery disputes. In the motion, defense

4

counsel indicates that, pursuant to the court’s Standing Orders, the pre-filing meet and confer

5

requirement does not apply to this motion because plaintiff is not represented by counsel. ECF

6

No. 43 at 2. The undersigned is uncertain what portion of her Standing Orders give this

7

impression. Absent citation to specific authority to the contrary, defendant must comply with the

8

meet-and-confer requirements of Local Rule 251, or one of its applicable exceptions.

9

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

10

1. The discovery period in this case is reopened until October 4, 2019 for the limited purpose

11

of considering the motion to compel and, if ordered, conducting plaintiff’s deposition;

12

2. Defendant’s motion to compel (ECF No. 43) is DENIED without prejudice to its renewal

13

following satisfaction of the meet-and-confer requirements under the Local Rules; and

14
15
16

3. The hearing set for September 11, 2019 is VACATED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: August 23, 2019

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2