Raimondo et al v. Federal Bureau of Investigation

Filing 68

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley granting 63 Motion for Protective Order (ahm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/11/2015)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 DENNIS JOSEPH RAIMONDO, et al., Case No. 13-cv-02295-JSC Plaintiffs, 10 ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER v. United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, 13 Defendant. Re: Dkt. No. 63 14 15 Defendant’s Motion for a Protective Order seeking to quash deposition subpoenas issued 16 to two former FBI employees came before the Court for hearing on September 10, 2015. (Dkt. 17 No. 63.) For the reasons stated on the record, the motion is GRANTED without prejudice to 18 Plaintiffs’ renewal of their request for additional targeted discovery following receipt of 19 Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. 20 In light of this ruling, the Court modifies the briefing schedule on the forthcoming motions 21 for summary judgment as follows: 22 November 12, 2015: Defendant files motion for summary judgment. 23 November 20, 2015: Plaintiffs notify Defendant of whether they desire to obtain additional targeted discovery. Parties should meet and 24 confer thereafter. 25 26 27 28 December 1, 2015: Plaintiffs forward Defendant their portion of a joint discovery letter brief regarding the additional discovery sought. 1 December 10, 2015: Parties file their joint discovery letter brief. 2 December 17, 2015: Hearing on Plaintiffs’ request for additional discovery at 9:00 a.m. 3 4 If following the filing of Defendant’s motion for summary judgment the parties agree on 5 additional discovery, but believe a modification of the schedule is needed, they may stipulate to an 6 amended schedule. 7 8 9 If upon review of Defendant’s motion for summary judgment, Plaintiffs do not believe that further discovery is necessary, the previously established briefing schedule shall apply: December 17, 2015: judgment and cross motion for summary judgment. 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 January 28, 2016: summary judgment. 13 February 11, 2016: 17 18 19 Plaintiffs file reply in support of Plaintiffs’ cross motion for summary judgment. 15 16 Defendant files reply in support of motion for summary judgment and opposition to Plaintiffs’ cross motion for 12 14 Plaintiffs file opposition to Defendant’s motion for summary March 3, 2016: Hearing on cross motions for summary judgment. This Order disposes of Docket No. 63 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September 11, 2015 20 ________________________ JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY United States Magistrate Judge 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?