Lewis et al v. Wells Fargo & Co.

Filing 93

ORDER DENYING [Docket No. 77] Letter Brief filed by Wells Fargo & Co. For Additional Time to Produce STAMP Data, or in the alternative, To Stay Discovery. Signed by Judge Joseph C. Spero on 3/31/09. (klh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/31/2009)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 v. WELLS FARGO & CO., Defendant(s). ___________________________________/ On February 27, 2009, Defendant filed a Letter Brief for Additional Time to Produce STAMP Data, or in the alternative, To Stay Discovery. On March 30, 2009, the matter came on for hearing. Jahan Sagafi and Kelly Dermody, appeared for Plaintiffs. Alison Tsao and Tim Freudenberger, counsel for Defendant, appeared. For reasons stated on the record, and good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. On or before April 3, 2009, Defendant shall provide to Plaintiffs the summary STAMP data for the Specific Job Titles previously identified by Plaintiffs. 2. On April 8 or 9, 2009 Ms. Dermody and Mr. Freudenberger, lead trial counsel, shall meet and confer in person on (a) the request by Plaintiffs for Phase I discovery (Paragraph 1 of the Court's Order of January 26, 2009) on job titles or families proposed by Plaintiffs in February, 2009, and (b) Plaintiffs' request for detailed STAMP data on the Specific Job Titles for which Defendant has produced summary STAMP data or for which Defendant will produce summary STAMP data pursuant to paragraph one of this Order. 3. In the event that the meeting set forth in paragraph 2 of this Order does not resolve the two issues listed, the parties shall, within (1) one week of the meeting, submit a MARTIN LEWIS, ET. AL, Plaintiff(s), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case No. C08-02670 (CW) JCS ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ADDITIONAL TIME TO PRODUCE STAMP DATA, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO STAY DISCOVERY [Docket No. 77]

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

joint letter detailing the basis for each side's position, responses to the opposing side's position, and proposed compromise. The Court will then determine what future proceedings are necessary. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 31, 2009

__________________________ JOSEPH C. SPERO United States Magistrate Judge

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

2