Varnado v. Midland Funding LLC et al

Filing 31

AMENDED Order by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu denying 29 Discovery Letter Brief without prejudice and ordering further meet and confer.(dmrlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/31/2014) (Entered: 03/31/2014)CORRECTION OF DOCKET # 30 Modified on 3/31/2014 (dmrlc2, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
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 KAREN D VARNADO, 12 13 Plaintiff(s), v. 14 MIDLAND FUNDING LLC, 15 No. C-13-05705-DMR (DMR) Amended ORDER RE DISCOVERY PROCEDURES AND DENYING EX PARTE DISCOVERY LETTER [DOCKET NO. 29] WITHOUT PREJUDICE Defendant(s). ___________________________________/ 16 17 18 TO ALL PARTIES AND COUNSEL OF RECORD: Plaintiff has filed an ex parte discovery letter. [Docket No. 29.] The court DENIES the letter 19 without prejudice and orders the parties to meet and confer pursuant to the procedures in this order, 20 the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Northern District of California’s Local Rules, General 21 Orders, and Standing Orders. Local rules, general orders, standing orders, and instructions for using 22 the Court's Electronic Case Filing system are available at Failure to 23 comply with any of the rules or orders may be a ground for sanctions. 24 If the parties are unable to resolve the instant dispute after meeting and conferring, they shall 25 file a joint letter regarding the disputes shall be filed no later than April 11, 2014. In Defendants’ 26 portion of the letter, they shall address Plaintiff’s assertion that Defendants did not participate in 27 Plaintiff’s previous attempts to meet and confer in a timely fashion. Discovery letter briefs must be 28 1 e-filed under the Civil Events category of Motions and Related Filings > Motions - General > 2 "Discovery Letter Brief." 3 4 RESOLUTION OF DISCOVERY DISPUTES In order to respond to discovery disputes in a flexible, cost-effective and efficient manner, 5 the court uses the following procedure. The parties shall not file formal discovery motions. Instead, 6 as required by the federal and local rules, the parties shall first meet and confer to try to resolve their 7 disagreements. The meet and confer session must be in person or by telephone, and may not be 8 conducted by letter, e-mail, or fax. If disagreements remain, the parties shall file a joint letter no 9 later than five business days after the meet and confer session, unless otherwise directed by the court. Lead trial counsel for both parties must sign the letter, which shall include an attestation 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 that the parties met and conferred in person or by telephone regarding all issues prior to filing the 12 letter. Going issue-by-issue, the joint letter shall describe each unresolved issue, summarize each 13 party’s position with appropriate legal authority; and provide each party’s final proposed 14 compromise before moving to the next issue. The joint letter shall not exceed ten pages without 15 leave of court. Parties are expected to plan for and cooperate in preparing the joint letter so 16 that each side has adequate time to address the arguments. In the rare instance that a joint letter 17 is not possible, each side may submit a letter not to exceed four pages, which shall include an 18 explanation of why a joint letter was not possible. The parties shall submit one exhibit to the letter 19 that only sets forth each disputed discovery request in full, followed immediately by the objections 20 and/or responses thereto. No other information shall be included in any such exhibit. No other 21 exhibits shall be submitted without prior approval by the court. The court will review the 22 submission(s) and determine whether formal briefing or proceedings are necessary. Discovery 23 letter briefs must be e-filed under the Civil Events category of Motions and Related Filings > 24 Motions - General > "Discovery Letter Brief". 25 In the event that a discovery hearing is ordered, the court has found that it is often efficient 26 and beneficial for counsel to appear in person. This provides the opportunity, where appropriate, to 27 engage counsel in resolving aspects of the discovery dispute while remaining available to rule on 28 any disputes that counsel are not able to resolve. For this reason, the court expects counsel to appear 2 1 in person. Permission for a party to attend by telephone may be granted, in the court's discretion, 2 upon written request made at least one week in advance of the hearing if the court determines that 3 good cause exists to excuse personal attendance, and that personal attendance is not needed in order 4 to have an effective discovery hearing. The facts establishing good cause must be set forth in the 5 request. 6 In emergencies during discovery events (such as depositions), any party may, after 7 exhausting good faith attempts to resolve disputed issues, seek judicial intervention pursuant to Civil 8 L.R. 37-1(b) by contacting the court through the courtroom deputy. If the court is unavailable, the 9 discovery event shall proceed with objections noted for the record. CHAMBERS COPIES AND PROPOSED ORDERS 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 Pursuant to Civil L.R. 5-1(e)(7) and 5-2(b), parties must lodge an extra paper copy of certain 12 filings and mark it as a copy for “Chambers.” Please three-hole punch the chambers copy and 13 submit it to the Oakland Clerk’s Office. 14 Any stipulation or proposed order submitted by an e-filing party shall be submitted by email 15 to as a word processing attachment on the same day the document is e- 16 filed. This address should only be used for this stated purpose unless otherwise directed by the 17 court. 18 PRIVILEGE LOGS 19 If a party withholds information that is responsive to a discovery request by claiming that it 20 is privileged or otherwise protected from discovery, that party shall promptly prepare and provide a 21 privilege log that is sufficiently detailed and informative for the opposing party to assess whether a 22 document’s designation as privileged is justified. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(5). The privilege log shall 23 set forth the privilege relied upon and specify separately for each document or for each category of 24 similarly situated documents: 25 (a) the title and description of the document, including number of pages or 26 Bates-number range; 27 (b) the subject matter addressed in the document; 28 (c) the identity and position of its author(s); 3 1 (d) the identity and position of all addressees and recipients; 2 (e) the date the document was prepared and, if different, the date(s) on which it was 3 sent to or shared with persons other than its author(s); and 4 (f) the specific basis for the claim that the document is privileged or protected. 5 Communications involving trial counsel that post-date the filing of the complaint need not be 6 placed on a privilege log. Failure to furnish this information promptly may be deemed a waiver of 7 the privilege or protection. S Dated: March 31, 2014 . Ryu 13 LI onna M Judge D DONNA M. RYU 12 RT United States Magistrate Judge ER 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4 A H For the Northern District of California 11 NO United States District Court 10 DERED O OR IT IS S R NIA IT IS SO ORDERED. FO UNIT ED 9 RT U O 8 S DISTRICT TE C TA N F D IS T IC T O R C

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?