Totah v. Lucasfilm Entertainment Company, Ltd

Filing 87

DISCOVERY ORDER re 83 Letter, filed by Lucasfilm Entertainment Company, Ltd. Signed by Judge Maria-Elena James on 11/5/2010. (mejlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/5/2010)

Totah v. Lucasfilm Entertainment Company, Ltd

Doc. 87

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 UNITED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12
For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Northern District of California
TABITHA TOTAH, v. Plaintiff, No. C 09-4051 MMC (MEJ) ORDER RE: DISCOVERY DISPUTE (DKT. #83)

LUCASFILM ENTERTAINMENT CO., Defendant. _____________________________________/

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

Before the Court is a joint discovery dispute letter filed on November 2, 2010 by Plaintiff Tabitha Totah ("Plaintiff") and Defendant Lucasfilm Entertainment Company, Ltd. ("Defendant"). ("Joint Letter," Dkt. #83.) The letter concerns the continued deposition of Howard Roffman, President of Licensing at Lucasfilm. The parties previously filed a joint discovery dispute letter on August 25, 2010, also regarding Roffman's deposition, which took place on February 26, 2010. (Dkt. #50.) After review of the August 25 letter, the Court issued an order on September 24, 2010, which permitted Plaintiff to depose Mr. Roffman for additional 3.5 hours "on any subject." ("Discovery Order," Dkt. #54 at 2.) However, on September 20, 2010, prior to the Court issuing its Order, Plaintiff deposed Mr. Roffman for approximately 42 minutes, asking questions concerning Mr. Roffman's personal life, and more specifically his photography of young nude men. (Joint Letter at 2.) Defense counsel instructed him not to answer. In the present letter, Defendant seeks a protective order to prevent Plaintiff from deposing Mr. Roffman about his personal hobby, sexual orientation and sexual activity, arguing that it is irrelevant, duplicative and an invasion of his right to privacy. (Joint Letter at 3, 4.) The Court agrees. Accordingly, Mr. Roffman need not answer questions regarding his sexual orientation,

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 UNITED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12
For the Northern District of California

sexual activity, and his photography. Additionally, Defendant seeks to clarify whether it can subtract the 42 minutes from the additional 3.5 hours the Court permitted for Mr. Roffman's continued deposition. Although the Court recognizes the importance of Mr. Roffman's time and the inappropriate nature of Plaintiff's questioning, it also finds it important to allow Plaintiff sufficient time to depose him on issues that are germane to her Complaint. Accordingly, the 42 minutes shall not be deducted from the 3.5 hours permitted for the second deposition. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 5, 2010

_______________________________ Maria-Elena James Chief United States Magistrate Judge

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