Li v. A Perfect Day Franchise, Inc

Filing 52

ORDER re 47 Tentatively Finding Plaintiffs Motion Requesting Discovery re Arbitrability Moot. Signed by Judge Patricia V. Trumbull on 8/3/10. (pvtlc1) (Filed on 8/4/2010)

Li v. A Perfect Day Franchise, Inc

Doc. 52

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 The holding of this court is limited to the facts and the particular circumstances underlying the present motion. OR D E R, page 1
Dockets.Justia.com
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

GUIFU LI, et al.,

) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) A PERFECT DAY FRANCHISE, INC., et ) al., ) ) Defendants. ) ___________________________________ )

Case No.: C 10-1189 LHK PVT ORDER TENTATIVELY FINDING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION REQUESTING DISCOVERY RE ARBITRABILITY MOOT (Re: Docket No. 47)

On August 2, 2010, Plaintiffs filed a Motion Requesting Discovery re Arbitrability, along with a motion to shorten time for hearing that motion.1 Having reviewed the papers submitted by the parties, the court finds it appropriate to issue this order without further briefing or oral argument. Based on the moving papers presented, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the court tentatively finds Plaintiffs' motion MOOT. From the docket herein, it appears that the parties have already met and conferred regarding the limits on discovery and regarding preserving discoverable evidence. See Joint Case Management Conference Statement (docket no. 29, ¶¶ 6 & 8). While the parties have not yet made their initial disclosures, they have agreed on a date for initial disclosures. See Joint Case Management Conference Statement

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

(docket no. 29, ¶ 7). As it appears the parties have had a substantive Rule 26(f) meet and confer, and because the deadline for them to complete that meet and confer has passed, the Rule 26(d) stay on discovery is no longer in effect. No other stay on discovery appears on the docket. Thus, discovery is open and no motion for leave to conduct discovery is necessary. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, if Defendants contend the Rule 26(d) stay on discovery remains in effect, then no later than August 9, 2010, Defendants shall file a brief setting forth the basis for that contention, and also responding to the Plaintiffs' motion to shorten time. If the Defendants do not file any such brief on or before August 9, 2010, this tentative order will become final without further action by the court. Dated: 8/3/10 PATRICIA V. TRUMBULL United States Magistrate Judge

OR D E R, page 2