Felarca et al v. Birgeneau et al

Filing 341

ORDER DENYING EX PARTEDISCOVERY LETTERS 338 339 340 . Signed by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu on 12/9/14. (dmrlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/9/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
YVETTE FELARCA, ET AL.,

12

Plaintiff(s),

13

v.

14

ORDER DENYING EX PARTE
DISCOVERY LETTERS [DOCKET NOS.
338, 339, 340]

ROBERT J. BIRGENEAU, ET AL.,

15

No. C-11-05719 DMR

Defendant(s).
___________________________________/

16
17

The court has received Plaintiffs’ three ex parte discovery letters. [Docket Nos. 338, 339,

18

340.] The court’s standing order on discovery, see Docket No. 227, requires the parties to meet and

19

confer in person or by telephone prior to requesting judicial intervention for discovery disputes, and

20

requires the parties to file a joint letter after the meeting and conferring if they are unable to resolve

21

their disputes without judicial intervention. Plaintiffs’ letters indicates that the parties are still in the

22

process of meeting and conferring about the discovery disputes, and the ex parte letters are

23

premature. Accordingly, the ex parte letters are denied without prejudice. The parties shall meet

24

and confer regarding the disputes raised in the letter. If they remain unable to resolve these disputes

25

without judicial intervention, the parties shall file a single joint discovery letter by December 18,

26

2014.

27
28

In Docket No. 440, Plaintiffs moves to compel the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office
(“ACSO”) to respond to a subpoena. Plaintiffs state that counsel for ACSO (Lynn Stocker, who also

1

represents Defendants Garcia and Obichere) refuses to meet and confer regarding Plaintiffs’

2

discovery requests. If this is true, then counsel for ACSO shall file a one-page letter by December

3

11, 2014 setting forth counsel’s explanation for her refusal to meet and confer. Otherwise, Plaintiffs

4

and ACSO shall meet and confer regarding the disputes raised in Docket No. 440, and shall file a

5

joint discovery letter by December 18, 2014 if they are unable to resolve those disputes without

6

judicial intervention.

7

The court also notes that the three letters filed by Plaintiffs were not properly categorized on

8

the docket as motions. Any future discovery letters shall be filed on the court’s ECF system under

9

the Civil Events category of Motions and Related Filings > Motions - General > “Discovery Letter
Brief.”

16

M. Ryu
Donna
DONNA M. RYU
Judge

R NIA

15

Dated: December 9, 2014

FO

14

DERED

O OR
IT IS S

United States Magistrate Judge

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2

A

H

ER

LI

13

UNIT
ED

IT IS SO ORDERED.

RT

For the Northern District of California

12

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT
U
O

S

11

NO

United States District Court

10

N

D IS T IC T
R

OF

C