Ojmar US, LLC v. Security People, Inc. et al

Filing 99

Discovery Order re 93 request for sanctions. Signed by Judge Maria-Elena James on 7/7/2017. (mejlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/7/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 OJMAR US, LLC, Case No. 16-cv-04948-HSG (MEJ) Plaintiff, 8 DISCOVERY ORDER v. Re: Dkt. No. 93 9 10 SECURITY PEOPLE, INC., et al., Defendants. United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 Defendants ask the undersigned to award them the attorneys’ fees they incurred in 14 connection with an earlier “motion to compel.” Jt. Ltr. Br., Dkt. No. 93. The “motion to compel” 15 at issue is a Joint Letter Brief the parties filed, pursuant to the undersigned’s Standing Order re: 16 Discovery, regarding the scope of the waiver of the attorney client privilege. See Jt. Ltr. Br. re: 17 Waiver, Dkt. No. 80. Paragraph 5 of the undersigned’s Standing Order re: Discovery addresses 18 motions for sanction: “Motions for sanctions shall be filed separately, pursuant to Federal Rule 37 19 and Civil Local Rules 7 and 37-3.” Civil Local Rule 7 requires motions for sanctions to be 20 noticed for hearing at least 35 days after the filing of the motion. The parties’ Joint Letter Brief 21 does not comport with these requirements, and for that reason is denied without prejudice. 22 The Court also observes the following: while it found that the waiver did not extend as far 23 as Plaintiff contended it did, and that Plaintiff’s request was not proportional, the Court made no 24 findings that the request was not substantially justified or was made in bad faith. See Order at 2, 25 Dkt. No. 84. The parties have asked the undersigned to resolve a number of discovery disputes, 26 27 28 1 and there has not been a consistent prevailing party in connection with those disputes. See, e.g., 2 Order re: 180 Patent (granting Plaintiff’s request for discovery). 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 6 7 8 Dated: July 7, 2017 ______________________________________ MARIA-ELENA JAMES United States Magistrate Judge 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 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?