Ismael Jimenez et al v. David Y Tsai et al

Filing 73

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd re 70 Discovery Dispute Joint Report No. 1. (hrllc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/3/2017)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

ISMAEL JIMENEZ, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

13
14
15
16

Case No.5:16-cv-04434-EJD (HRL)
ORDER RE DISCOVERY DISPUTE
JOINT REPORT NO. 1

v.
DAVID Y TSAI, et al.,

Re: Dkt. No. 70

Defendants.

17

In Discovery Dispute Joint Report (“DDJR”) #1, the defendants seek an order authorizing

18

them to take over 30 depositions, a number far above the presumptively-sufficient 10 depositions

19

allowed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(a)(2). Defendants have not yet taken any depositions. Plaintiffs

20

oppose the request.

21

Today, the presiding judge conducted with counsel a telephonic discovery conference

22

which focused on the issue presented in DDJR #1. The upshot was that defendants were permitted

23

15 depositions, to commence forthwith. If defendants want more, they should bring their request

24

to this court in accordance with its Standing Order on Civil Discovery Disputes.

25

This court believes that no such request should be brought by defendants until most, if not

26

all, of the 15 allowed depositions have been taken. If this court were to grant such a request, it

27

would need to be based on a detailed, particularized, and persuasive showing of a need for more.

28

Defendants’ showing in DDJR #1 is insufficient.

1

DDJR #1 is terminated, without prejudice.

2

SO ORDERED.

3

Dated: August 3, 2017

4
5
HOWARD R. LLOYD
United States Magistrate Judge

6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2