Castaneda v. Burger King Corporation et al

Filing 279

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT BURGER KING CORPORATION'S OBJECTIONS TO NOVEMBER 25 DISCOVERY ORDER. Signed by Judge Alsup on December 23, 2009. (whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/23/2009)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 MIGUEL CASTANEDA, KATHERINE CORBETT, and JOSEPH WELLNER, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. BURGER KING CORPORATION, Defendant. / IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

No. C 08-04262 WHA

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT BURGER KING CORPORATION'S OBJECTIONS TO NOVEMBER 25 DISCOVERY ORDER

On November 25, 2009, Magistrate Judge Larson issued a discovery order in this action granting plaintiffs leave to serve five additional interrogatories. On December 14, 2009, defendant Burger King Corporation objected to that discovery order pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a). Rule 72(a) states: A party may serve and file objections to the order within 14 days after being served with a copy. A party may not assign as error a defect in the order not timely objected to. The deadline for objections to the November 25 discovery order was December 9.1

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure were revised effective as of December 1, 2009. Under the previous Rule 72(a) objections had to be filed within10 days excluding weekends and holidays which in this instance would have resulted in a deadline of December 10, 2009. Defendant's objections would have been untimely under the previous rules as well. Pursuant to Rule 6(d), three days are added to the deadline to respond if service is made under Rule 5(b)(2)(C), (D), (E) or (F). Even assuming arguendo that this 3-day extension applies to Magistrate Larson's order pursuant to Rule 72(a), defendant's objections would still be untimely.

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Defendant Burger King Corporation's objections are therefore untimely. They are accordingly DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 23, 2009.

WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2