Karnazes v. County of San Mateo et al

Filing 85

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST TO CONTINUE BRIEFING SCHEDULE re 84 Letter filed by Elizabeth Karnazes. Signed by Judge Maria-Elena James on 6/2/2010. (mejlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/2/2010)

Law Offices California State Bar Number 118922 P.O. Box 4747 Foster City, California 94404-0747 Telephone [phone] Honorable Maria-Elena James Presiding Magistrate Judge United States District Court for the Northern District of California 450 Golden Gate Avenue San Francisco, California 94102 June 2, 2010

Elizabeth Karnazes

Re: Karnazes v. County of San Mateo, USDC NDCA Case No. 09-767 MMC (MEJ) Plaintiff's Notice of unavailability served and filed March 29, 2010, BEFORE Defendants' discovery motions were filed Dear Judge James: I again apologize to the court for this inconvenience. This letter will confirm that I filed my Notice of Unavailability of Counsel including the dates of June 6-27, 2010, on March 29, 2010, Docket entry #56. Opposing counsel, David Silberman ("hereinafter referred to as "Silberman"), continues to be unwilling to speak with me to meet and confer on any matters in this litigation. Attorney Silberman deliberately set his motions during my noticed period of unavailability. I cannot possibly respond before I leave town. My Modified Notice of Unavailability filed May 28, 2010, Docket #80, only adds a couple of days, June 4-5, 2010, to my previous notice. I respectfully request that the court set any hearings in this matter for July 19, 2010, or after. Additionally, I declare under penalty of perjury that I supplied a release to Mark Heitner, M.D. for all my records months prior to the court ordering me to do so. I am informed and believe that Dr. Heitner has served Defendants with my entire file and has delivery confirmation as proof thereof. I have consistently stated that Dr. Heitner is available to have his deposition taken and he remains available to appear for his deposition at an agreed date and time at his usual professional rate. Again, I apologize for bothering the court with these problems. I believe an order compelling Attorney Silberman to meet and confer in person with me at the courthouse after I return from my noticed period of unavailability would result in a resolution of our discovery disputes such that no motion would be necessary. I reserve the right to bring motions against Defendants for their discovery abuses, including but not limited to their latest discovery responses that are wholly inadequate. Thank-you for your consideration. Sincerely,
UNIT ED
S DISTRICT TE C TA

RT U O

Elizabeth Karnazes In the past six months, Plaintiff has made herself unavailable for nearly three of those months. (Dkt. ##34, 56, 80.) This is unfair to Defendants and disruptive to the Court's schedule. Accordingly, Plaintiff shall comply with Civil Local Rule 7 and all previous Court orders. cc: David Silberman 1

S

DENIE

D

ER

N

F D IS T IC T O R

A

C

LI

FO

na aria-Ele Judge M

James

R NIA

NO

RT

H