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)
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?