Abdul Nevarez v. Forty Niners Football Company, LLC

Filing 191

ORDER by Judge Judge Susan van Keulen granting 182 Discovery Letter Brief. (svklc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/16/2018)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

ABDUL NEVAREZ, et al.,

Case No. 16-cv-07013-LHK (SVK)

Plaintiffs,

8

ORDER REGARDING JULY 11, 2018,
JOINT DISCOVERY LETTER BRIEF

v.

9
10

FORTY NINERS FOOTBALL COMPANY,
LLC, et al.,

11

Re: Dkt. No. 182

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Defendants.
12
Before the Court is the Parties’ July 11, 2018 Joint Discovery Letter Brief in which

13
14

Plaintiffs seek further inspections of Levi’s Stadium on an expedited basis. ECF 182.

15

Specifically, Plaintiffs seek inspection of (1) entry gates/security checkpoints and (2) “satellite”

16

Team Stores “as these are usually set up for event days” (collectively, “subject areas”). Id. For

17

the reasons set forth below, Plaintiffs’ request is GRANTED.
Although Plaintiffs’ motion is prompted by the recent Order Continuing Case Management

18
19

Conference (“CMC Order”) issued on July 6, 2018, ECF 181, which set a July 27, 2018, deadline

20

for Plaintiffs to file an amended complaint that “include[s] identification of all barriers,” the

21

Parties have known about the need to conduct inspections of the subject areas for several months.1

22

Indeed, Plaintiffs raised the inspection of the two subject areas on January 26, 2018, while the

23

parties were onsite conducting a five-day inspection. ECF 182 at 2. Defendants point out, and

24

Plaintiffs do not deny, that Plaintiffs have not followed up directly since then, and Defendants

25

claim that they offered to make at least one of the areas available during one of the March

26
27
28

1

The Joint Letter, unhelpfully, sets out a long recitation by each Party complaining as to how the
other side behaved during the inspections in January of this year. The only issue before the Court
is whether additional inspections are currently warranted in a limited time frame.

1
2

inspections. Id. at 5.
What Plaintiffs have done in the intervening months is file three lists of barriers, file expert

3

reports in support of class certification identifying additional barriers, and most recently, in

4

preparation for mediation, submit yet another set of lists with yet more barriers. See ECF 181.

5

Plaintiffs’ preparation and production of these multiple barrier lists, without seeking to complete

6

inspections of the subject areas, is troubling.

7

However, fact discovery closes in October, and it would not have been unreasonable for

8

Plaintiffs to have been operating under an assumption that they had at least some additional time

9

to address this issue. Plaintiffs correctly point out that the exigency of the situation, conducting
these inspections in the next ten days and then filing an amended pleading, has arisen as a result of

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

the CMC Order just issued on July 6, 2018. Plaintiffs promptly contacted Defendants on that date

12

to schedule the inspections, Defendants objected, and the Parties’ submitted the dispute to the

13

Court on July 11, 2018. As a practical matter, Plaintiffs have moved quickly, once the deadline

14

was imposed. That action, along with the strong interests of judicial economy to have all of

15

Plaintiffs’ viable claims in suit, supports granting Plaintiffs’ request to complete the inspections in

16

time to allow Plaintiffs to amend their complaint.

17

Defendants argue that they cannot accommodate inspections of the subject areas on such

18

short notice, particularly as they are configured in relevant time periods. Defendants also cite an

19

upcoming event, preparations for which further hinder inspections on short notice. The Court

20

acknowledges these concerns and recognizes the burden to meet the July 27, 2018, deadline

21

created by the Court’s CMC Order. Nonetheless, the interests of judicial economy in establishing

22

a complete factual foundation upon which to adjudicate the case outweighs these burdens.

23
24
25

Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ request for further site inspections is GRANTED, with
inspections to be completed no later than July 26, 2018.
SO ORDERED.

26
27
28
2

1

Dated: July 16, 2018

2
3
SUSAN VAN KEULEN
United States Magistrate Judge

4
5
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
3