Lewis v. Home Depot, U.S.A., Inc. et al
Filing
31
ORDER Re In Camera Review of Medical Documents. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 6/12/2013. (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/12/2013)
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
AARON LEWIS,
9
Plaintiff,
v.
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
No. C-12-6354 EMC
HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC., et al.,
12
ORDER RE IN CAMERA REVIEW OF
MEDICAL DOCUMENTS
Defendants.
___________________________________/
13
14
15
The parties in the above-referenced case have stipulated to an in camera review of certain
16
medical records related to the treatment of Plaintiff. See Docket No. 30 (stipulation). Plaintiff has
17
lodged a copy of the documents with the Court, and the Court has reviewed those documents.
18
Having reviewed the documents, the Court hereby orders that some, but not all, documents be
19
produced. The Court notes that, for some documents (Bates-stamped 20, 21, 24, and 136) it has not
20
been able to conduct an in camera review because the doctor’s handwritten notes are illegible.
21
However, given the Court’s rulings here, the parties should be able to meet and confer and work out
22
any remaining disputes with respect to these documents. If not, the parties should file a joint letter
23
within two weeks of the date of this order, addressing what the remaining dispute is and each party’s
24
respective position. Plaintiff must also transcribe any handwritten notes, if necessary, to enable the
25
Court’s review and resolution of the dispute.
26
27
28
The Court’s rulings here are informed by the parties’ compromise agreement that Plaintiff
would produce documents responsive to the modified subpoena. See Docket No. 30 (Stip. ¶ 7).
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
(1)
Plaintiff shall produce documents Bates-stamped 5-6, 9-12, and 131-32 because they
are probative of an injury related to stress.
(2)
Plaintiff need not produce documents Bates-stamped 16-18 and 53-54 because they
do not appear to be responsive to the modified subpoena.
(3)
Plaintiff shall produce documents Bates-stamped 39-42 because the modified
subpoena specifically asks for billing and insurance information.
This order resolves Docket No. 30.
8
9
IT IS SO ORDERED.
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
Dated: June 12, 2013
12
_________________________
EDWARD M. CHEN
United States District Judge
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?