Somers v. Digital Realty Trust Inc et al

Filing 283

ORDER by Judge Kandis A. Westmore denying 280 Motion to Strike. (kawlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/6/2018)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 PAUL SOMERS, Plaintiff, 8 ORDER DENYING MOTION TO STRIKE v. 9 10 DIGITAL REALTY TRUST INC, et al., 11 United States District Court Northern District of California Case No. 14-cv-05180-EMC (KAW) Defendants. Re: Dkt. No. 280 12 13 On February 27, 2018, Defendants Digital Realty Trust Inc.'s and Ellen Jacobs's lead 14 counsel filed a notice of unavailability. (Dkt. No. 279.) The notice of unavailability was 15 withdrawn that same day. (Id.) On February 28, 2018, Plaintiff Paul Somers filed a motion to 16 strike the notice of unavailability.1 (Dkt. No. 280.) On March 1, 2018, Defendants filed an 17 opposition to Plaintiff's motion, stating that the notice of unavailability was inadvertently filed and 18 had already been retracted. (Dkt. No. 281 at 1.) Because the notice of unavailability was 19 withdrawn prior to Plaintiff's filing of his motion, Plaintiff's motion to strike is DENIED as moot. 20 In Plaintiff's motion, Plaintiff also appears to state that he "has fulfilled his obligations to 21 meet and confer and will file the motion for sanctions." (Dkt. No. 280 at 2.) The Court has 22 insufficient information to determine whether the meet and confer obligation was in fact met. The 23 Court does, however, remind the parties of their obligation to meet and confer in good faith. 24 Further, the Court has warned the parties that they are not to file any further discovery-related 25 letters or requests except as related to the production ordered in the July 11, 2017 order. (Dkt. No. 26 27 28 1 Although Plaintiff filed the instant motion before the presiding judge, the motion is related to a discovery dispute, and has thus been referred to the undersigned for resolution. (See Dkt. No. 282.) 1 266 at 1-2.) To the extent Plaintiff's motion for sanctions is related to a discovery dispute that 2 could have been raised by Plaintiff in the letter that was to be filed on March 14, 2017 and/or the 3 letter filed on April 29, 2017, but was not, those discovery disputes have been deemed waived. 4 (Dkt. No. 245 at 2, 13, 17, 20; see also Dkt. Nos. 191, 212, 218, 221, 238, 266.) 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 6, 2018 __________________________________ KANDIS A. WESTMORE United States Magistrate Judge 7 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

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?