Green v. City and County of San Francisco et al
Filing
112
Discovery Order. Oral argument is set for September 5, 2019 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom A on the 15th floor for the letter briefs concerning Special Interrogatory No. 19, Requests for Production Nos. 38 & 39, and Special Interrogatory No. 22. Signed by Judge Thomas S. Hixson on 8/30/2019. (tshlc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/30/2019)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
MORRIS GREEN,
Plaintiff,
8
9
10
11
Case No. 17-cv-00607-TSH
DISCOVERY ORDER
v.
Re: Dkt. No. 111
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN
FRANCISCO, et al.,
United States District Court
Northern District of California
Defendants.
12
13
Plaintiff Morris Green and Defendant City and County of San Francisco have filed four
14
joint discovery letter briefs. ECF No. 111. The Court sets oral argument for September 5, 2019 at
15
10:00 a.m. in Courtroom A on the 15th floor for the letter briefs concerning Special Interrogatory
16
No. 19, Requests for Production Nos. 38 & 39, and Special Interrogatory No. 22.
17
The Court GRANTS Green’s motion to compel with respect to Request for Admission No.
18
27 and ORDERS the City to respond within 30 days. Whether or not Cruz applied for the exact
19
same position that Green did is immaterial because it appears that she applied for and got a
20
comparable position. That is enough to make her experience and qualifications relevant.
21
The Court GRANTS Green’s motion to compel with respect to Requests for Production
22
Nos. 31 and 32 and ORDERS the City to produce responsive documents within 30 days. These
23
documents are directly relevant to Green’s claim of discrimination. The City asserts that Green
24
lacks the requisite experience for this job, but these documents will allow Green to test that
25
assertion. The City is correct that these RFPs implicate privacy interests, but that concern can be
26
mitigated by the entry of a protective order. This District has model protective orders that parties
27
can use. See https://cand.uscourts.gov/model-protective-orders. The Court ORDERS the parties
28
to submit a stipulated proposed protective order within 15 days to address the City’s privacy
1
concern. Finally, the City’s argument that allowing this discovery will open the door to similar
2
discovery for the several dozen other positions Green applied for does not make sense because fact
3
discovery closed on August 22, 2019, and yesterday was the last day to move to compel.
4
5
IT IS SO ORDERED.
6
7
Dated: August 30, 2019
8
THOMAS S. HIXSON
United States Magistrate Judge
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?