Robertson v. Struffert
Filing
75
ORDER RE DISCOVERY MOTIONS. Signed by Judge JEFFREY S. WHITE on 1/29/15. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/29/2015)
1
2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
3
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
4
5
WAYNE J ROBERTSON,
6
7
8
Plaintiff,
No. C 12-04698 JSW
v.
W STRUFFERT, et al.,
9
ORDER RE DISCOVERY
MOTIONS
Defendants.
/
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
On January 23, 2015, Plaintiff filed two motions: (1) a Motion to Compel Production of
12
Documents (ECF No. 72), and (2) a Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery (ECF
13
No. 73). As to the Motion to Compel, this issue is not properly before the Court. Pursuant to
14
the Court’s Civil Standing Orders, the parties must prepare a joint letter brief if they wish the
15
Court to consider this issue. See Judge White’s Civil Standing Orders ¶ 8. The Court therefore
16
STRIKES this motion, without prejudice to the renewing of the issue by way of joint letter
17
brief. With respect to the Motion for Extension of Time, Plaintiff represents that Defendants
18
agree to the extension, but the Court cannot accept Plaintiff’s unsupported assertion on this
19
matter. If Defendants agree that an extension of time is warranted, the parties must file a
20
stipulation and proposed order to that effect. Therefore, the Court DENIES the Motion for
21
Extension of Time, without prejudice to a renewal should the parties file a stipulation on this
22
matter.
23
24
IT IS SO ORDERED.
25
26
27
28
Dated: January 29, 2015
JEFFREY S. WHITE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?