Veliz et al v. Cintas Corporation et al
ORDER RE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE DISCOVERY. Signed by Judge Maria-Elena James on 4/28/2009. (mejlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/28/2009)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3) 2) The Court is in receipt of the parties' letters, filed April 27-28, 2009, regarding Magistrate Judge Seeborg's recent summary judgment orders and how they affect the pending affirmative defense discovery dispute. (Dkt. ##1568, 1569.) As the parties should know by now, the letters do not comply with the undersigned's discovery standing order. Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS the parties to meet and confer in person and thereafter file a joint letter addressing the following: 1) Whether, after Judge Seeborg's rulings, the parties are able to agree on any of Plaintiffs' Proposed Stipulations. Whether, after Judge Seeborg's rulings, the parties are able to agree on any revised stipulations. For any stipulations on which the parties are still unable to agree, how Judge Seeborg's rulings alter their prior positions. For clarity purposes, the parties' letter shall be in the same format as the April 6, 2009 briefing from the parties. In other words, the letter's headings shall be "Plaintiffs' Proposed vs. CINTAS CORPORATION, et al., Defendant(s). / PAUL VELIZ, et al., Plaintiff(s), No. C 03-1180 RS (MEJ) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ORDER RE LETTER BRIEFS
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Stipulation No. 1," "Plaintiffs' Proposed Stipulation No. 2," etc., and each side's revised position shall be listed under the relevant heading. The joint letter shall be no more than 10 pages. IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 28, 2009
MARIA-ELENA JAMES 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?