Otey v. Crowdflower, Inc. et al

Filing 73

DISCOVERY ORDER by Judge Maria-Elena James granting Defendants' protective order request re: 72 Discovery Letter Brief (cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/15/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 CHRISTOPHER OTEY Plaintiff, 8 v. No. C 12-5524 CRB (MEJ) DISCOVERY ORDER RE: DKT. NO. 72 9 CROWDFLOWER, INC., et al., 10 12 For the Northern District of California UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 Defendants. _____________________________________/ The Court is in receipt of the parties’ joint discovery dispute letter, filed March 14, 2013. 13 Dkt. No. 72. The letter relates to 203 Requests for Admission and 139 Requests for Production that 14 Plaintiff has served on Defendants. Defendants have responded to 86 of Plaintiff’s RFAs 15 agreed to respond to 43 of Plaintiff’s RFPs by April 8, 2013. However, as Defendants have filed a 16 motion to bifurcate, which seeks to preliminarily focus discovery and motion practice in this action 17 on the issue of whether Defendants were Plaintiff’s “employer” for purposes of the FLSA and 18 Oregon law, Defendants request entry of a protective order from responding to the remainder of 19 Plaintiff’s RFAs and RFPs until after Judge Breyer rules on the bifurcation/stay motion. In addition, 20 Defendants argue that Plaintiff has already filed a motion for conditional collective-action 21 certification and there is therefore no purpose, at this stage, in conducting class discovery. Upon 22 review of the parties’ letter, the Court agrees that it is prudent to limit discovery until such time as 23 Judge Breyer has determined the bifurcation motion. Accordingly, Defendants’ request for a 24 protective order is GRANTED. 25 and IT IS SO ORDERED 26 27 28 Dated: March 15, 2013 _______________________________ Maria-Elena James United States Magistrate Judge

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?