Valencia et al v. Comcast Corporation et al

Filing 88

Order by Magistrate Judge Nandor J. Vadas denying 56 Motion for Sanctions.(njvlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/21/2017) Modified on 2/21/2017 (njvlc1, COURT STAFF). Modified on 2/21/2017 (njvlc1, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 EUREKA DIVISION 7 8 LAMBERTO VALENCIA, et al., Case No. 15-cv-04771-JSW (NJV) Plaintiffs, 9 ORDER RE MOTION FOR SANCTIONS v. Re: Dkt. No. 56 10 11 COMCAST CORPORATION, et al., United States District Court Northern District of California Defendants. 12 13 On September 22, 2016, Defendant Comcast ("Comcast") filed a Motion for Sanctions in 14 this action. (Doc. 56.) Comcast alleged that 1) numerous Plaintiffs had not complied with the 15 court's order to provide signed and dated verifications to their interrogatory responses; 2) Plaintiff 16 Ryan Murray had failed to comply with the order to sit for his deposition or dismiss his case; 3) 17 certain Plaintiffs had failed to comply with the order to respond to particular requests for 18 production of documents, and 4) certain Plaintiffs' supplemental responses were incomplete. The 19 court held a hearing on this matter on November 1, 2016. (Doc. 71.) The matter was heard before 20 the court again on December 8, 2016. (Doc. 77.) At that hearing, Plaintiffs' counsel indicated that 21 all non-responding Plaintiffs would be dismissed. The parties confirmed that no issues remain to 22 be resolved at this time. 23 24 25 26 27 28 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Comcast's Motion for Sanctions is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 21, 2017 ______________________________________ NANDOR J. VADAS United States Magistrate Judge

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?