Perez et al v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company et al

Filing 440

ORDER RE PARTIES DISCOVERY MOTIONS. SEE DOCKET NOS. 412, 413, 415. Signed by Judge Paul S. Grewal on August 1, 2011. (psglc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/1/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11

SAN JOSE DIVISION

12
13
14
15
16
17

SARAH PEREZ, ET AL.,

)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
v.
)
)
STATE FARM MUTUAL
)
AUTOMOBILE INS. CO., ET AL.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
__________________________________ )

Case No.: C-06-01962 JW (PSG)
ORDER RE PARTIES’ DISCOVERY
MOTIONS
(Docket Nos. 412, 413, 415)

18
On July 27, 2011, the parties appeared for hearing on additional discovery disputes on an
19
20

expedited basis.1 That same day, Chief Judge Ware extended the close of class discovery to
September 16, 2011.2 On August 1, 2011, Chief Judge Ware granted Defendant State Farm

21
Mutual Automobile Insurance Company’s (“State Farm”) motion for leave to file motion for
22

reconsideration and stay of Rule 56(d) discovery.3 Accordingly,

23
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that State Farm and Liberty Mutual’s request to continue
24
25
1

26
27

The procedure for such expedited consideration was set forth in an order dated July 1,
2011. The parties described their disputes in letters submitted on July 15, 2011, to which
responses were filed on July 22, 2011.
2

See Docket No. 435.

3

See Docket No. 438.

28

ORDER, page 1

1

deadlines for all Rule 56(d) discovery is DENIED as moot.

2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ request for sanctions is DENIED without

3

prejudice to a renewed motion. Plaintiffs seek sanctions to address, among other things,

4

production issues related to third-party claims, pre-production review of documents for

5

responsiveness, and Defendants’ alleged failure to include any of Plaintiffs’ proposed search

6

terms. In light of the July 27 order extending the deadline for class discovery and the August 1

7

order staying Rule 56(d) discovery, however, Plaintiffs’request is premature. To the extent

8

Plaintiffs wish to renew their request for sanctions after the deadlines for class and Rule 56(d)

9

have passed, they may do so by filing a motion and noticing a hearing pursuant to Civ. L.R. 7-2.

10

Any opposition and reply briefs may be filed pursuant to Civ. L.R. 7-3.

11

IT IS SO ORDERED.

12
Dated:

August 1, 2011

13
14

PAUL S. GREWAL
United States Magistrate Judge

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDER, page 2