Stark et al v. Diageo Chateau & Estate Wines Company

Filing 29

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME; SETTING HEARING ON DISCOVERY ISSUES AND MOTION TO STRIKE by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers; granting 28 Motion to Shorten Time. Hearing on the Motion to Strike and pending discovery issues shall be held Wednesday, September 5, 2012 at 9:00am. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/31/2012)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5
6
7

CHRISTIAN STARK et al.,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10
11

vs.

Case No.: 12-CV-4385 YGR
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME;
SETTING HEARING ON DISCOVERY ISSUES AND
MOTION TO STRIKE

DIAGEO CHATEAU & ESTATE WINES CO.,
Defendant

Northern District of California

United States District Court

12
13
14

TO ALL PARTIES AND COUNSEL OF RECORD:
The Court has been advised that the parties are having difficulty scheduling depositions and

15

are having difficulty concerning the confidentiality designations. Defendant has filed a Motion to

16

Strike the Amended Complaint, which added a third plaintiff to this lawsuit; the Motion to Strike

17

alternatively seeks to continue the case management dates, including discovery cutoffs and the

18

September 19, 2012 hearing on preliminary injunction.

19

A hearing regarding the Motion to Strike, and any pending discovery issues shall be held on

20

Wednesday, September 5, 2012 at 9:00 a.m., in the Federal Courthouse located at 1301 Clay Street,

21

Oakland, California, Courtroom 5. In advance of the hearing, the parties are ORDERED to Meet and

22

Confer in person to resolve any discovery disputes, including scheduling depositions and

23

confidentiality designations, as well as whether the case management dates and hearing on

24

preliminary injunction should be continued. The Court is available to reschedule the hearing on

25

preliminary injunction to any of the following dates/times: September 21, September 26, the morning

26

of September 27, and October 3.

27
28

With respect to confidentiality designations, the parties are reminded that this is a public
forum. To the extent that any documents will be used in court proceedings, a party’s confidentiality

1

designation does not mean that the documents will ultimately be sealed in a public proceeding. In

2

determining whether to seal documents, a court must weigh relevant factors including the “public

3

interest in understanding the judicial process and whether disclosure of the material could result in

4

improper use of the material for scandalous or libelous purposes or infringement upon trade secrets.”

5

Pintos v. Pacific Creditors Ass’n, 605 F.3d 665, 679 n. 6 (9th Cir. 2010) (quoting Hagestad v.

6

Tragesser, 49 F.3d 1430, 1434 (9th Cir. 1995)). In effect, a sealing order would require the Court to

7

lock the courtroom doors as to the proffered material during the hearing. While the decision to seal is

8

within the trial court’s discretion, the basis for sealing must be compelling and the Court must

9

articulate its reasoning in approving such a request. Pintos, 605 F.3d at 679.

10

By no later than 2:00 p.m. on September 4, 2012, counsel shall file a JOINT STATEMENT:

Northern District of California

(1) notifying the Court that the parties were able to resolve all discovery issues; or (2) concisely

12
United States District Court

11

summarizing those remaining discovery issues that counsel were unable to resolve.

13

The Defendant’s Motion to Shorten Time, Dkt. No. 28, is GRANTED. By no later than 2:00

14

p.m. on September 4, 2012, Plaintiff shall file either: (1) an Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to

15

Strike; (2) or stipulate to continue the case management dates, including discovery cutoffs and the

16

September 19, 2012 hearing on preliminary injunction. If Plaintiff so stipulates, the parties shall

17

advise the Court of the date to reschedule the hearing on preliminary injunction. The Court is

18

available on: September 21, September 26, the morning of September 27, and October 3.

19

If all issues have been resolved then no appearance will be necessary and the hearing will be

20

taken off calendar. Otherwise, personal appearance of lead counsel will be required. Neither a

21

special appearance nor a telephonic appearance will be permitted.

22
23
24
25

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Date: August 31, 2012
________________________________________
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

26
27
28

2