American Small Business League v. Department of Defense

Filing 105


Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 AMERICAN SMALL BUSINESS LEAGUE, Plaintiff, 12 13 14 15 No. C 14-02166 WHA v. ORDER DENYING STIPULATED REQUEST TO CONTINUE DISCOVERY HEARING DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, Defendant. / 16 17 On October 2, plaintiff submitted a letter “to inform the Court that [the parties] have 18 exhausted efforts to meet and confer concerning two outstanding discovery disputes . . . that are 19 ripe for adjudication.” That letter also noted that “[t]he parties . . . are available generally the 20 week of October 9, 2017 and thereafter” (Dkt. No. 101). An order dated October 3 set a meet- 21 and-confer and discovery hearing for October 10 to resolve those disputes (Dkt. No. 102). On 22 October 4, defendants also submitted a letter describing another “discovery dispute” concerning 23 defendants’ contentions that plaintiff’s “expert designations are both untimely and substantively 24 improper,” and the expert opinions in question are inadmissible to boot (Dkt. No. 103). 25 Today, the parties submitted a stipulated request to continue the meet-and-confer and 26 discovery hearing from October 10 to October 19 “or another subsequent date” on the basis that 27 defendants are internally considering whether to “release additional information [that] may 28 resolve some matters presently in dispute,” but “the additional information may not be released 1 by October 10, particularly if Sikorsky objects to the release.” Also, the parties add, “it will be 2 more efficient to postpone the meet-and-confer and discovery hearing for a short period, 3 particularly because counsel for ASBL will travel from Washington, D.C. to attend these events” 4 (Dkt. No. 104 ¶¶ 4–6). The request offers no other details regarding the timing of defendants’ 5 internal deliberations. It provides no assurance that said deliberations would complete by 6 October 19 even if the requested continuance were granted. And it give no other explanation 7 why counsel’s travel from Washington, D.C., would be more efficient later rather than sooner. 8 9 The stipulated request is DENIED. The meet-and-confer and discovery hearing remain set for October 10 at 9:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m., respectively, and shall include the dispute raised by defendants’ letter dated October 4 (Dkt. No. 103). Plaintiff may respond to that letter by 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 OCTOBER 8 AT NOON. 12 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 15 Dated: October 5, 2017. WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?