Littler et al v. Bay Area Rapid Transit District ("BART") et al

Filing 50

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu denying 40 Discovery Letter Brief. (dmrlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/19/2016)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

EMILY LITTLER, et al.,

Case No. 14-cv-05072-DMR

Plaintiffs,
8
v.

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’
MOTION TO COMPEL

9
10

12

Re: Dkt. No. 40

Defendants.
The parties filed a joint discovery letter on February 9, 2016 in which Defendants move to

13

compel the production of documents. [Docket No. 40.] The fact discovery cut-off was January

14

12, 2016. On February 17, 2016, the court issued an order noting that Defendants’ motion

15

appeared untimely pursuant to Civil Local Rule 37-3, which provides that “no motions to compel

16

fact discovery may be filed more than 7 days after the fact discovery cut-off.” [Docket No. 41.]

17

To the extent that Defendants asserted that the motion to compel was timely because it related to

18

expert discovery, which did not close until February 9, 2016, the court ordered Defendants to

19

submit a one-page letter by the close of business on February 18, 2016 explaining how the

20

discovery at issue related to expert discovery and identifying all retained experts in this case. No

21

such letter was filed. Accordingly, the court assumes that the discovery at issue was fact
discovery. Therefore, Defendants’ motion to compel is denied as untimely pursuant to Rule 37-3.

RT

28

R NIA

Donna M. Ryu
United States Magistrate Judge

. Ryu

onna M
Judge D

NO

27

DERED
SO OR
______________________________________
IT IS

H

ER

FO

26

Dated: February 19, 2016

LI

25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT
U
O

24

S

23

A

22

UNIT
ED

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT
("BART"), et al.,

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C