Armstrong v. Bauer's Intelligent Transportation, Inc.

Filing 48

Discovery Order re: 47 Discovery Letter Brief PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR COURT TO FASHION ALTERNATIVE DISCOVERY PROCEDURE AND/OR SCHEDULE TELEPHONIC CONFERENCE; DECLARATION OF JOEL B. YOUNG, ESQ. filed by Rory Armstrong. Signed by Judge Maria-Elena James on 7/10/2014. (cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/10/2014)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

RORY ARMSTRONG,

Case No. 13-cv-02691-MMC (MEJ)

Plaintiff,
8

DISCOVERY ORDER

v.

Re: Dkt. No. 47

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

BAUER’S INTELLIGENT
TRANSPORTATION, INC.,
Defendant.

12
13

On June 10, 2014, the Court ordered Defendant Bauer’s Intelligent Transportation, Inc. to

14

produce a representative sample of Route Sheets for all corporate transit work performed during

15

the period from March 29, 2009 onwards. Dkt. No. 43. The Court ordered the parties to meet and

16

confer to determine a reasonable sampling. Now before the Court is Plaintiff Rory Armstrong’s

17

Request for Court to Fashion Alternative Discovery Procedure, filed July 8, 2014. Dkt. No. 47. In

18

his request, Plaintiff states that the parties met and conferred on June 13, 2014, at which time

19

Defendant disclosed for the first time that it does not have any Route Sheets for the years 2009,

20

2010, or before a certain date in 2011. Plaintiff requests that the Court order Defendant to (1)

21

produce all Route Sheets in an unredacted form, for all corporate shuttle work performed from

22

2011 and onwards, and also (2) provide names and contact information for all clients for whom

23

corporate shuttle work was performed from March 29, 2009 up through the date in 2011.

24

Upon review of Plaintiff’s request, the Court finds that Plaintiff has not shown good cause

25

to require Defendant to produce all Route Sheets at this stage in the litigation. Accordingly, the

26

Court DENIES Plaintiff’s requests. The parties shall comply with the June 10 Order, but limited

27

to a representative sample for Route Sheets available from 2011 onwards. The Court ORDERS

28

Defendant to serve on Plaintiff, by July 17, 2014, a declaration from its person most

1

knowledgeable that it does not have any Route Sheets for the years 2009, 2010, or before a certain

2

date in 2011 in its possession, custody, or control.

3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

4
5
6
7

Dated: July 10, 2014
______________________________________
MARIA-ELENA JAMES
United States Magistrate Judge

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2