Ansari v. Electronic Document Processing, Inc et al

Filing 58

Order by Hon. Lucy H. Koh denying 53 Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery.(lhklc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/22/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 SAN JOSE DIVISION United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ALLEN ANSARI, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT PROCESSING, ) INC., a California corporation; DUSTIN K. ) FERRO, individually and in his official capacity; ) and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, ) ) Defendants. ) ) Case No. 5:12-CV-01245-LHK ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINE AND CONTINUE ALL SCHEDULED DATES 60 DAYS On February 15, 2013, Plaintiff Allen Ansari (“Plaintiff”) filed an administrative motion 19 seeking to extend the February 15, 2013 deadline for discovery and continue all scheduled dates in 20 the case by 60 days. See ECF No. 53. Plaintiff states that Plaintiff deposed certain employees of 21 Defendant Electronic Document Processing (“EDP”) on February 13 and 14, 2013. Id. at 2. 22 Plaintiff states that, at these depositions, “it became clear that there are many documents in the 23 possession, custody[,] or control of EDP[ that are] responsive to [Plaintiff’s] discovery requests[ 24 and] that have not been produced.” Plaintiff further states that, on February 14, 2013, Magistrate 25 Judge Lloyd ruled on the parties’ Discovery Dispute Joint Report #1 (ECF No. 47) and ordered 26 EDP to produce electronic spreadsheet data of Defendants’ service attempts on persons other than 27 the Plaintiff. ECF No. 53 at 2. Plaintiff represents that Plaintiff will require additional time to 28 1 Case No. 5:12-CV-01245-LHK ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINE AND CONTINUE ALL SCHEDULED DATES 60 DAYS 1 review the new information and also, potentially, to “depos[e]… [Federal Rule of Evidence] 404(b) 2 witnesses.” Id. at 3 Defendants oppose Plaintiff’s request for an extension of the dates and deadlines in this case. See ECF No. 55. Defendants represent that there are no new documents to be produced. Id. 5 at 2. Defendants contend that Judge Lloyd’s Order merely requires Defendants to produce certain 6 spreadsheets containing information relating to individuals served by Defendant Justin Ferro that 7 were previously produced in hard-copy with redactions of the individuals’ personal information 8 (e.g. addresses), in electronic form and without the redactions. Id. Defendants represent that they 9 will comply with Judge Lloyd’s Order by February 28, 2013 (the date set forth in the Order). Id. 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 4 Defendants further contend that Plaintiff’s request for more time to interview and depose potential 11 Rule 404(b) witnesses is in fact an effort to solicit witnesses who will testify that, like Plaintiff, 12 they were not served by Defendants. Id. 13 The Court declines to extend the discovery deadline or to continue any of the other dates in 14 this case. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4) provides that: “A schedule may be modified 15 only for good cause and with the judge's consent.” Here, the Court finds that Plaintiff has failed to 16 make a showing of good cause to extend the case schedule. Plaintiff contends that “there are many 17 documents… that have not been produced.” ECF No. 53 at 1-2. However, Plaintiff does not 18 identify what these documents are. Plaintiff also contends that Plaintiff will require additional time 19 to “gain EDP’s compliance with” Judge Lloyd’s Order. Id. at 2. However, Defendants represent 20 that they will produce the spreadsheet discussed in Judge Lloyd’s Order by the February 28, 2013 21 deadline set forth in the Order. Plaintiff has identified no evidence supporting the conclusion that a 22 60 day extension of the discovery deadline is required in order to ensure Defendants produce a 23 spreadsheet. Finally, the Court is not persuaded by Plaintiff’s vague assertion that, after receiving 24 the spreadsheet, Plaintiff will need to take additional discovery and to depose additional potential 25 404(b) witnesses. See id. at 3. Indeed, to the extent that Plaintiff is simply intending to depose 26 new witnesses to gain evidence that Defendant Ferro falsely represented that he had served those 27 witnesses just as he falsely represented that he served Plaintiff, this evidence would likely not be 28 2 Case No. 5:12-CV-01245-LHK ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINE AND CONTINUE ALL SCHEDULED DATES 60 DAYS 1 admissible pursuant to Rule 404 and 403. See Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)(1) (“Evidence of a crime, 2 wrong, or other act is not admissible to prove a person’s character in order to show that on a 3 particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character.”); Fed. R. Evid. 403 (“The 4 court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger 5 of one or more of the following: unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue 6 delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence”). 7 For the reasons set forth above, Plaintiff’s request to extend the discovery deadlines and 8 continue all scheduled dates in the case by 60 days is DENIED. 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 12 22, Dated: February __, 2013 _________________________________ Lucy H. Koh H. KOH LUCY United United District Judge Judge States States District 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 Case No. 5:12-CV-01245-LHK ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINE AND CONTINUE ALL SCHEDULED DATES 60 DAYS

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?