ADT Security Services, Inc. v. Pinnacle Security, LLC et al

Filing 11

NOTICE OF REFERENCE AND ORDER TO MEET AND CONFER AND FILE JOINT LETTER re 1 MOTION to Compel filed by ADT Security Services, Inc. Discovery Hearing/Lead trial counsel meet and confer set for 4/30/2012 at 09:15 AM in Courtroom G, 15th Floor, San Francisco before Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero. Signed by Judge Joseph C. Spero on 4/6/12. (klhS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/6/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 ADT SECURITY SERVICES, INC., 8 9 Plaintiff(s), v. NOTICE OF REFERENCE; ORDER TO MEET AND CONFER AND FILE JOINT LETTER PINNACLE SECURITY LLC, ET AL., 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 No. C 12–MC-80096 CRB (JCS) Defendant(s). ___________________________________/ 12 13 14 TO ALL PARTIES AND COUNSEL OF RECORD: The above matter has been referred to Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero for Plaintiff’s 15 Motion to Compel Enforcement of FRCP 45 Document Subpoena Directed to Golden Gate Capital 16 (the “Motion”) [Docket No. 1]. 17 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that lead trial counsel for Plaintiff, and lead trial counsel for 18 Golden Gate Capital, shall meet and confer in person in Courtroom G on April 30, 2012, at 9:15 19 a.m. Counsel may contact the undersigned’s Courtroom Deputy, Karen Hom, at (415) 522-2035 20 regarding questions about the meet-and-confer session. 21 In the event that counsel are unable to resolve the matters at issue in the Motion, lead trial 22 counsel shall provide a detailed Joint Letter to the Court within five (5) calendar days of their meet- 23 and-confer session. This Joint Letter, not to exceed ten (10) pages without leave of Court, shall 24 include a description of every issue in dispute and, with respect to each such issue, a detailed 25 summary of each party’s final substantive position and its final proposed compromise on each issue. 26 LAW AND MOTION HEARING PROCEDURES 27 28 Civil law and motion is heard on Friday mornings, at 9:30 a.m., Courtroom G, 15th Floor, United States District Court, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California, 94102. 1 2 3 In the event a future discovery dispute arises, IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that before filing any discovery motion before this Court, the parties must comply with the following: 1. Lead trial counsel for both parties must meet and confer in person regarding the such as telephone, e-mail, teleconference, or correspondence, have been unsuccessful. 6 Once those efforts have proved unsuccessful, any party may demand a meeting of 7 lead trial counsel to resolve a discovery matter. Such a meeting shall occur within ten 8 (10) calendar days of the demand. The locations of the meetings shall alternate. The 9 first meeting shall be at a location selected by counsel for Plaintiff(s). If there are any 10 future disputes, the next such meeting shall be held at a location to be determined by 11 For the Northern District of California matter(s) at issue. This meeting shall occur after other efforts to resolve the dispute, 5 United States District Court 4 counsel for Defendant(s), etc. 12 2. Within five (5) calendar days of the in-person meeting between lead trial counsel 13 referred to above, the parties shall jointly file a detailed letter with the Court, not to 14 exceed ten (10) pages without leave of Court, which will include the matters that 15 remain in dispute, a detailed substantive description of each side’s position on each 16 such issue, and a description of each side’s proposed compromise on each such issue. 17 In the absence of permission from the Court, the letter may not exceed five (5) pages. 18 19 20 3. After the Court has received the joint letter, the Court will determine what future proceedings, if any, are necessary. In the event that the parties continue to be unable to resolve the matters regarding the timing 21 and scope of discovery, the Court will consider what future actions are necessary. These actions 22 may include the following: (1) sanctions against a party failing to cooperate in the discovery process 23 and meet and confer in good faith, as required by this Order, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 24 and the Local Rules of this Court; and/or (2) requiring the Chief Executive Officers of each party to 25 attend the in-person, meet-and-confer sessions described above. The Court is not entering either of 26 these matters as an Order of the Court at this time, and fully expects counsel to meet their 27 obligations under this Order and under the Local Rules. 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Regardless of whether the Court reschedules a hearing date, all opposition and reply papers shall be timely filed according to the originally noticed hearing date, pursuant to Civil L. R. 7-3. A party or counsel has a continuing duty to supplement the initial disclosure when required under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e)(1). All filings of documents relating to motions referred to the undersigned shall list the civil case number and the district court judge’s initials followed by the designation “(JCS)”. IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s counsel Jeffrey M. Goldman shall serve a copy of this order only on counsel for Golden Gate Capital. 9 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 ELECTRONIC FILING AND COURTESY COPIES Please refer to Civil L. R. 5-4 and General Order No. 45 for the Northern District of California for information relating to electronic filing procedures and requirements. 12 BEFORE NOON ON THE NEXT BUSINESS DAY FOLLOWING THE ELECTRONIC 13 FILING, THE PARTIES ARE REQUIRED TO LODGE DIRECTLY WITH CHAMBERS ONE 14 PAPER COPY OF EACH DOCUMENT, WHICH IS TO BE DESIGNATED "JCS’S CHAMBERS' 15 COPY." 16 17 18 The failure of counsel or a party to abide by this Order may result in sanctions pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(f). IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Dated: April 6, 2012 JOSEPH C. SPERO 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?