Banga v. Experian Information Solutions et al

Filing 59

ORDER re Plaintiff's Deposition; RECOMMENDATION re Discovery Deadline 47 , 58 . Signed by Magistrate Judge Edward M. Chen on 5/13/2009. (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/13/2009) Modified on 5/14/2009 (jlm, COURT STAFF).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 v. EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, et al., Defendants. ___________________________________/ KAMLESH BANGA, Plaintiff, No. C-08-4147 SBA (EMC) ORDER RE PLAINTIFF'S DEPOSITION; AND RECOMMENDATION RE DISCOVERY DEADLINE (Docket Nos. 47, 58) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

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

The Court held a telephonic hearing on May 13, 2009, regarding a dispute over Plaintiff's deposition. This order memorializes the ruling made by the Court at the hearing and further includes a recommendation to the presiding judge regarding the discovery deadline. A. Plaintiff's Deposition The Court is willing to delay Plaintiff's deposition for a limited period of time so that Plaintiff may try to obtain representation by counsel. However, given the trial schedule in this case, the deposition may not be delayed indefinitely. Plaintiff's deposition shall take place on May 26, 2009, at 10:00 a.m. Plaintiff indicated in her declaration that she is willing to be deposed on that date and she confirmed such at the hearing. The deposition shall take place on May 26 regardless of whether Plaintiff has obtained counsel by that date. Plaintiff's deposition shall be up to seven hours in length as provided for by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(d). Defendants shall timely notify Plaintiff of the location where the deposition will take place.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

B.

Discovery Deadline Because Plaintiff's deposition is being delayed, the Court recommends that the presiding

judge continue the discovery deadline by two weeks -- i.e., from June 26, 2009, to July 10, 2009, without changing any other hearing or trial dates. This will ensure that Defendants incur no prejudice from the delayed deposition. It appears that this change can be accommodated without affecting the presiding judge's dispositive motion and trial schedule. This order disposes of Docket Nos. 47 and 58.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

Dated: May 13, 2009 _________________________ EDWARD M. CHEN United States Magistrate Judge

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

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 v. EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, et al., Defendants. ___________________________________/ KAMLESH BANGA, Plaintiff, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE No. C-08-4147 SBA (EMC) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

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

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the U.S. District Court, Northern District of California. On the below date, I served a true and correct copy of the attached, by placing said copy/copies in a postage-paid envelope addressed to the person(s) listed below, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail; or by placing said copy/copies into an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Office of the Clerk. KAMLESH BANGA P.O. Box 6025 Vallejo, CA 94591 [phone] Dated: May 13, 2009 ALL OTHER COUNSEL SERVED VIA ELECTRONIC FILING ("E-FILING")

RICHARD W. WIEKING, CLERK

By:

/s/ Leni Doyle Deputy Clerk