Illumina, Inc. et al v. BGI Genomics Co., Ltd et al
Discovery Order re Case Referred to Magistrate Judge for Discovery. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas S. Hixson on 10/10/2019. (Attachments: #1 Standing Order re Discovery)(rmm2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/10/2019)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
DISCOVERY STANDING ORDER FOR
MAGISTRATE JUDGE THOMAS S. HIXSON
This Standing Order informs all parties of the discovery procedures for cases assigned to Magistrate
Judge Thomas S. Hixson or referred for purposes of discovery. It addresses all case-related discovery,
including that which involves non-parties, and therefore applies whether or not an individual or entity
is named in the complaint. Failure to abide by this Standing Order may result in the imposition of
sanctions pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(f) and Civil Local Rule 37-4.
All questions should be directed to Judge Hixson’s Courtroom Deputy, Rose Maher, at
firstname.lastname@example.org or (415) 522-4708.
Upon referral from a District Judge or upon the development of an impasse with respect
to discovery in a pending case assigned to Judge Hixson, no motions to compel shall be considered.
Instead, the parties must first meet and confer. That is, counsel for each party shall meet and confer in
person, or, if counsel are located outside the Bay Area, by telephone, to attempt to resolve their dispute
informally. A mere exchange of letters, e-mails, telephone calls or facsimile transmissions does not
satisfy the meet and confer requirement.
MEET AND CONFER REQUIREMENTS
If the parties are unable to resolve their dispute informally after a good faith effort, including
meet and confer efforts conducted by lead counsel, the parties have two options:
1) If the dispute is straightforward, or the parties believe some initial informal guidance from the
Court may help the parties resolve their dispute without the need for briefing, the parties may
contact Judge Hixson’s Courtroom Deputy, Rose Maher, to arrange a telephonic conference with
2) For more complex disputes, the parties shall prepare a joint statement of not more than five pages
(12-point or greater font) that contains the following:
A cover page (excluded from the five-page limit) with the case caption, an
attestation that the parties met and conferred in person (or by telephone if outside the
Bay Area) in good faith to resolve their dispute(s) prior to filing the letter, and the
signature of both parties or counsel;
Each party’s position, including pertinent factual background, requested relief, and
citations to relevant legal authority; and
Each party’s final proposed compromise
The joint letter shall not be accompanied by exhibits or affidavits other than relevant excerpts
of discovery requests and responses, privilege logs, deposition testimony, and meet and confer
Revised September 5, 2018
The joint statement shall be e-filed (unless the case is exempt from e-filing requirements)
under the Civil Events category of “Motions and Related Filings > Motions – General >
Discovery Letter Brief.”
Upon review of the parties’ submission[s], the Court will advise the parties of how the Court
intends to proceed. The Court may issue a ruling or schedule a telephone conference or in
person conference with the parties, and at such conference may issue rulings, order more
formal briefing, or set further hearing dates. The Court may also order the parties to come to
the courthouse to meet and confer in good faith.
The parties do not need to submit chambers copies for cases subject to electronic filing, except for
documents that exceed 10 pages when combined. For these documents only, the submitting party shall
comply with Civil Local Rule 5-1(e)(7). All chambers copies should be double-sided (when possible)
and include: (1) the ECF running header (case number, docket number, date, and ECF page number) at
the top of each page; and (2) if the filing includes exhibits, they must be clearly delineated with tabbed
dividers. These printed copies shall be marked “Chambers Copy” and submitted to the Clerk’s Office
(not chambers), in an envelope marked with “Magistrate Judge Hixson,” the case number, and
If parties believe a protective order is necessary, they shall, where practicable, use one of
the model stipulated protective orders (available at http://cand.uscourts.gov/stipprotectorder). If the
parties’ proposed protective offer differs materially from the model protective order, the parties shall
file a statement explaining each modification to the model order, along with a redline version
comparing the proposed protective order with the model order.
No motion for sanctions may be filed until after the moving party has complied with the requirements
above. Motions for sanctions shall be filed separately, pursuant to Federal Rule 37 and Civil Local
Rules 7 and 37-4.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
THOMAS S. HIXSON
United States Magistrate Judge
Revised September 5, 2018
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?