Lawrence v. City and County of San Francisco et al

Filing 58

ORDER by Judge Maria-Elena James re: 57 Motion to Amend/Correct Protective Order. Parties ORDERED to meet and confer. (cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/28/2015)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 EMIL LAWRENCE, Case No. 14-cv-00820-MEJ Plaintiff, 8 ORDER RE: ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO MODIFY PROTECTIVE ORDER v. 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 57 Defendants. 12 13 On November 24, 2014, the Court entered a Stipulated Protective Order in this case, while 14 Plaintiff Emil Lawrence represented himself pro se. Dkt. No. 26. On July 31, 2015, the Court 15 appointed pro bono counsel for Plaintiff, who now moves for administrative relief to modify the 16 protective order and enter one based on this District’s model protective order. Dkt. No. 57. 17 Having reviewed Plaintiff’s motion, the Court finds good cause likely exists to enter a revised 18 protective order. Accordingly, rather than having this matter fully briefed, the Court ORDERS the 19 parties to meet and confer in person to determine whether they can agree on a revised protective 20 order, preferably based on this District’s model. If the parties are unable to agree, they shall file a 21 joint letter in compliance with the undersigned’s Discovery Standing Order. Accordingly, 22 Plaintiff’s motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 25 26 27 28 Dated: August 28, 2015 ______________________________________ 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?