Chavez et al v. Lumber Liquidators, Inc.

Filing 83

CORRECTION OF DOCKET # 82 .Order by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu denying without prejudice 73 Motion to Quash. Joint letter due by 3/9/12.Signed by Judge Donna M. Ryu on 03/05/2012. (dmrlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/5/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 CRELENCIO CHAVEZ, et al., 12 13 Plaintiffs, No. C-09-04812 SC (DMR) NOTICE OF REFERENCE AND ORDER RE DISCOVERY PROCEDURES v. 14 LUMBER LIQUIDATORS, 15 Defendant. ___________________________________/ 16 17 18 TO ALL PARTIES AND COUNSEL OF RECORD: The above matter has been referred to Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu for resolution of 19 Plaintiffs’ Motion to Quash Defendant Lumber Liquidators, Inc.’s Deposition Subpoena to its 20 Employee Carlos Alva ("Motion to Quash"), as well as all further discovery. The Motion to Quash 21 was noticed for hearing on April 6, 2012. 22 The court VACATES the current hearing date on the Motion to Quash and DENIES the 23 Motion to Quash without prejudice. The subpoena subject to the Motion to Quash shall not be 24 operative pending resolution of the instant dispute and the parties' compliance with the procedures 25 for resolution of discovery disputes as set forth below. Any joint letter regarding the instant 26 discovery dispute (see section below entitled "Resolution of Discovery Disputes") shall be filed by 27 no later than March 9, 2012. Such joint letter shall not exceed five pages. If, after reviewing the 28 1 parties’ joint letter, the court determines a hearing regarding the dispute is necessary, the court will 2 set this matter for a hearing. 3 Parties shall comply with the procedures in this order, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 4 and the Northern District of California’s Local Rules, General Orders, and General Standing Orders. 5 Local rules, general orders, general standing orders, and a summary of the general orders’ electronic 6 filing requirements (including the procedures for emailing proposed orders to chambers) are 7 available at http://www.cand.uscourts.gov. The parties’ failure to comply with any of the rules or 8 orders may be a ground for sanctions. 9 In order to respond to discovery disputes in a flexible, cost-effective and efficient manner, 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 RESOLUTION OF DISCOVERY DISPUTES the court uses the following procedure. The parties shall not file formal discovery motions. Instead, 12 as required by the federal and local rules, the parties shall first meet and confer to try to resolve their 13 disagreements. The meet and confer session must be in person or by telephone, and may not be 14 conducted by letter, e-mail, or fax. If disagreements remain, the parties shall file a joint letter no 15 later than five (5) business days after the meet and confer session. Lead trial counsel for both 16 parties must sign the letter, which shall include an attestation that the parties met and conferred in 17 person or by telephone regarding all issues prior to filing the letter. Going issue-by-issue, the joint 18 letter shall describe each unresolved issue, summarize each party’s position with appropriate legal 19 authority; and provide each party’s final proposed compromise before moving to the next issue. The 20 joint letter shall not exceed ten (10) pages without leave of court. In the rare instance that a joint 21 letter is not possible, each side may submit a letter not to exceed four (4) pages, which shall include 22 an explanation of why a joint letter was not possible. When appropriate, the parties may submit one 23 exhibit to the letter that sets forth each discovery request at issue in full, followed immediately by 24 the objections and/or responses thereto. No other information shall be included in any such exhibit. 25 No other exhibits shall be submitted without prior approval by the court. The court will review the 26 submission(s) and determine whether formal briefing or proceedings are necessary. 27 28 In emergencies during discovery events (such as depositions), any party may, after exhausting good faith attempts to resolve disputed issues, seek judicial intervention pursuant to Civil 2 1 L.R. 37-1(b) by contacting the court through the courtroom deputy. If the court is unavailable, the 2 discovery event shall proceed with objections noted for the record. 3 In the event that a discovery hearing is ordered, the court has found that it is often efficient 4 and beneficial for the parties if counsel appear in person. This provides the opportunity, where 5 appropriate, to engage counsel in resolving aspects of the discovery dispute while remaining 6 available to rule on any disputes that counsel are not able to resolve. For this reason, the court 7 expects counsel to appear in person. Permission for a party to attend by telephone may be granted, 8 in the court's discretion, upon written request made at least two weeks in advance of the hearing if 9 the court determines that good cause exists to excuse personal attendance, and that personal attendance is not needed in order to have an effective discovery hearing. The facts establishing good 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 cause must be set forth in the request. 12 13 14 15 CHAMBERS COPIES AND PROPOSED ORDERS All filings relating to a discovery dispute referred to Magistrate Judge Ryu shall list the civil case number and the district court judge’s initials followed by the designation “(DMR).” Under Civil L.R. 5-1(b), parties must lodge an extra paper copy of any filing and mark it as a 16 copy for “Chambers.” Please three-hole punch the chambers copy and submit it to the Oakland 17 Clerk’s Office. In a case subject to electronic filing, chambers copies must be submitted by the 18 close of the next court day following the day the papers are filed electronically. Any proposed 19 stipulation or proposed order in a case subject to electronic filing shall be submitted by email to 20 dmrpo@cand.uscourts.gov as a word processing format attachment on the same day that the 21 document is e-filed. This address should only be used for this stated purpose unless otherwise 22 directed by the court. 23 PRIVILEGE LOGS 24 If a party withholds information that is responsive to a discovery request by claiming that it 25 is privileged or otherwise protected from discovery, that party shall promptly prepare and provide a 26 privilege log that is sufficiently detailed and informative for the opposing part(ies) to assess whether 27 a document's designation as privileged is justified. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(5). The privilege log 28 3 1 shall set forth the privilege relied upon and specify separately for each document or for each 2 category of similarly situated documents: 3 a. 4 The title and description of the document, including number of pages or Batesnumber range; 5 b. The subject matter addressed in the document; 6 c. The identity and position of its author(s); 7 d. The identity and position of all addressees and recipients; 8 e. The date the document was prepared and, if different, the date(s) on which it was sent 9 Failure to furnish this information promptly may be deemed a waiver of the privilege or protection. UNIT ED Dated: March 5, 2012 15 D RDERE OO IT IS S 17 RT ER H 18 onna Judge D 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4 M. Ryu FO DONNA M. RYU United States Magistrate Judge 16 LI 14 S 13 S DISTRICT TE C TA R NIA IT IS SO ORDERED. A 12 The specific basis for the claim that the document is privileged or protected. RT U O For the Northern District of California 11 f. NO United States District Court 10 to or shared with persons other than its author(s); and N F D IS T IC T O R C

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?