Gasperin v. Furniture and Mattress Superstore

Filing 63

ORDER RE: 50 , 51 , AND 52 GRANTING MOTIONS TO COMPEL AND DENYING MOTION FOR SANCTIONS. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 01/04/2010. (rslc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/4/2010)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

*E-Filed 1/4/10*

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ISAIAS GASPERIN, v. Plaintiff, No. C 08-04477 RS ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS TO COMPEL AND DENYING MOTION FOR SANCTIONS

FURNITURE AND MATTRESS SUPERSTORE, et al., Defendants. ____________________________________/ In September of 2009, plaintiff filed a motion to compel further responses to written discovery and an accompanying motion for sanctions, separately filed in compliance with Civil Local Rule 7-8. In October of 2009, plaintiff filed a motion to compel defendants Steve Bui and Don Bui to appear for deposition. Upon receiving notice from the parties that they wished to participate in a settlement conference prior to going forward with the motions, the Court issued an order denying the motions without prejudice, and referring the matter to Judge Lloyd for a settlement conference. The Court was subsequently advised that the individual defendants failed to appear at the settlement conference. Defense counsel's motion to withdraw was granted, on shortened time. 1
No. C 08-04477 RS ORDER

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Plaintiff has now renewed both motions to compel and the motion for sanctions. Neither of the individual defendants, now appearing pro se, filed any response to the motion or appeared at the hearing. The unrepresented corporate defendant likewise has not responded. Good cause appearing, the motion to compel depositions is granted. Defendants Steve Bui and Don Bui shall appear for deposition within 30 days of the date of this order, at a date and time to be set by Counsel for plaintiffs, after making reasonable efforts to reach a mutual agreement with defendants as to scheduling. Good cause appearing, the motion to compel further responses to written discovery is granted. Defendants shall serve amended interrogatory responses and shall produce documents within 30 days of the date of this order. If defendants intend to participate in this action and wish to avail themselves of the safeguards of a protection order for any confidential financial information they are required to produce, they must contact plaintiff's counsel within five days of the date of this order to negotiate a stipulated protective order. Under all the circumstances here, the motion for sanctions is denied. Defendants are advised, however, that failure to comply with this order may result in the imposition of sanctions. In the event plaintiff receives no responses from defendants, plaintiff is directed to commence the process of seeking default judgment.

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 1/4/10 RICHARD SEEBORG
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2
No. C 08-04477 RS ORDER