Tamburri v. Suntrust Mortgage, Inc. et al

Filing 259

ORDER FOR SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION. The parties are ordered to provide supplemental information to their joint letter brief re 254 . Signed by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu on 06/05/2013. (dmrlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/5/2013)

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
DEBORAH TAMBURRI,

12

Plaintiff(s),

13

No. C-11-02899 DMR
ORDER FOR SUPPLEMENTAL
INFORMATION

v.

14

SUNTRUST MORTGAGE INC,

15

Defendant(s).
___________________________________/

16
17
18

The court is in receipt of the discovery letter brief (“Letter”) [Docket No. 254] of Plaintiff
Deborah Tamburri (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant SunTrust Mortgage, Inc. (“SunTrust”).

19

The parties’ discovery dispute concerns Plaintiff’s Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of SunTrust.

20

SunTrust designated two witnesses to cover the 52 topics in the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition notice:

21

Nicole Harwood, who was designated as SunTrust’s Rule 30(b)(6) witness on five topics, and

22

Beverly Dumas, who was designated as SunTrust’s Rule 30(b)(6) witness on the remaining topics.

23

Plaintiff and SunTrust apparently agree that Ms. Dumas was not adequately prepared to

24

provide testimony about all of the topics for which she was designated. However, the Letter did not

25

specify exactly which topics Plaintiff believes require further testimony, and whether SunTrust

26

agrees with Plaintiff’s list. Accordingly, the court orders as follows:

27
28

By June 7, 2013, Plaintiff shall provide Suntrust with a list of the specific topics in the Rule
30(b)(6) deposition notice about which Ms. Dumas was not prepared to provide testimony.

1

By June 10, 2013, SunTrust shall then indicate whether it agrees or disagrees that Ms.

2

Dumas not prepared to provide testimony about each topic identified by Plaintiff. SunTrust may not

3

add to Plaintiff’s list of topics.

4
5

If the parties agree on the topics about which Ms. Dumas was not prepared to provide Rule
30(b)(6) testimony, the parties shall file the list of topics by June 13, 2013.

6

If the parties disagree about the topics about which Ms. Dumas was not prepared to provide

7

testimony, the parties shall file the list of topics upon which they do agree by June 13, 2013. They

8

must meet and confer and submit a joint discovery letter pursuant to this court’s Standing Order on

9

any disputed topics by June 13, 2013.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13

Once the court receives the information ordered herein, it will address the dispute set forth in
the Letter.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 5, 2013

14
DONNA M. RYU
United States Magistrate Judge

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

2