John et al v. Garcia et al

Filing 65

ORDER CONTINUING STAY OF HEARING PENDING MEDIATION (granting 64 ) AND DENYING 60 REQUEST FOR DISCOVERY. Signed by Judge Alsup on 5/16/2017. Status Report due by 7/3/2017. (whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/16/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 9 ADRIAN JOHN, SR., et al., 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 No. C 16-02368 WHA Petitioners, v. 12 AGUSTIN GARCIA, et al., 13 ORDER CONTINUING STAY OF HEARING PENDING MEDIATION AND DENYING REQUEST FOR DISCOVERY Respondents. / 14 15 The Court is in receipt of the parties’ joint status report and request to further stay the 16 hearing on respondents’ motion to dismiss pending mediation on June 30 (Dkt. No. 64 at 2). 17 The request is GRANTED. The parties shall please submit another joint status report updating 18 the Court on the progress of mediation by JULY 3 AT NOON. Further continuances past July 3 19 are unlikely to be granted. 20 Additionally, the Court has reviewed petitioners’ submission titled, “Supplemental 21 Materials and Request for Discovery” (Dkt. No. 60). Statements in passive tense like “Ms. 22 Steele was recently denied use of the Elem PRC Program because she was deemed ineligible” 23 and “Ms. Steele was informed that she was not eligible for the Elem PRC Program” beg key 24 questions like who denied her use of the program and informed her that she was ineligible (see 25 id. at 5). Even the declaration itself suffers from the same defects, setting forth unhelpful 26 statements like “I was told that these expenses needed to be reimbursed directly by the Tribe” 27 and “I was denied access [to a tribal meeting]” (see id. at 99, 101). 28 1 It is unfair to the judge to make these non-specific statements, with citations to similarly 2 non-specific declarations buried in a hundred-page-plus combined document, and expect the 3 judge to surmise factual details that should be plainly set forth in petitioners’ request. The 4 Court is not convinced at this time that further discovery is warranted. Petitioners’ request is 5 therefore DENIED without prejudice to their renewing it at a later time. If the request is 6 renewed, however, it should be written in active voice and should clearly set forth complete and 7 accurate citations to supporting evidence. 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 Dated: May 16, 2017. WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?