J.C. v. Cambrian School District et al

Filing 48

ORDER CONCERNING DISCOVERY DISPUTES. The parties should complete the discovery allowed at the earliest possible time. Further, the parties should stipulate to a hearing date that allows plaintiffs to respond on the merits rather than to seek a continuance until they have obtained said discovery. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 11/22/2013. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/22/2013)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

J. C.,

Case No. 12-cv-03513-WHO
Plaintiff,

8
v.

ORDER CONCERNING DISCOVERY
DISPUTES

9
10

CAMBRIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al.,

Re: Dkt. Nos. 37, 47

Defendants.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

On November 8, 2013, plaintiff's counsel filed a 2-page letter identifying four discovery

14

disputes. Defendants responded on November 18, 2013. After consideration of the arguments

15

presented, the Court orders:

16

1. Plaintiffs may take the deposition of Jayne Selig at the earliest date convenient to Ms.

17

Selig and counsel. It appears that plaintiffs had identified her as a relevant witness,

18

that her deposition had been scheduled within the discovery period, and that the failure

19

to take the deposition within the discovery period resulted from miscommunication

20

between the parties after the original date for the deposition was postponed for good

21

cause.

22

2. Defendants have filed an amended response to Request No. 22 which states that no

23

responsive document exist, or have ever existed. If this response was verified,

24

defendants need do nothing further. If it was not, defendants should verify the

25

response.

26

3. Defendants have agreed to produce the Intra-district Transfer Permits sought by

27

plaintiffs. The Request was apparently dated July 24, 2013. The Court orders that this

28

production occur as quickly as possible, and no later than December 13, 2013.

1

4. Defendants do not address the fourth dispute, which leads the Court to hope that the

2

inspection schedule referred to in plaintiffs' letter has been agreed upon.

3

The Court notes that defendants have filed a motion for summary judgment. Assuming that the

4

discovery allowed above is material to plaintiffs' opposition to the motion, the parties should

5

complete the discovery allowed at the earliest possible time. Further, the parties should stipulate

6

to a hearing date that allows plaintiffs to respond on the merits rather than to seek a continuance

7

until they have obtained said discovery.

8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Dated: November 22, 2013
______________________________________
WILLIAM H. ORRICK
United States District Judge

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2