Barker v. Insight Global, LLC

Filing 97

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd re 91 defendants' Motion for Clarification. (hrllc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/2/2017)

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

JOHN BARKER,
Plaintiff,

13
14
15
16

Case No.5:16-cv-07186-BLF (HRL)
ORDER RE DEFENDANTS’ MOTION
FOR CLARIFICATION

v.
INSIGHT GLOBAL, LLC, et al.,

Re: Dkt. No. 91

Defendants.

17
18

This court recently issued its order deciding Discovery Dispute Joint Report #2. The court

19

now addresses defendant’s so-styled Motion for Clarification of that order. Plaintiff opposes the

20

motion on both procedural and substantive grounds. The court doubts that the order needs

21

clarifying. However, to move things along:

22

1. The court intended to deny any production of telephone logs.

23

2. The order in question required production of text messages that “constitute, state,

24

discuss, mention, allude to, or reference” certain specified activities with respect to

25

employment at Beacon Hill or defendant. Guided by what seems to be nothing more

26

than wishful thinking, the defendant urges an interpretation that is NOT limited to text

27

messages that are cabined by the definition. As far as the court is concerned, the order

28

means what it says, and defendant’s proposed “clarification” would be a dramatic

1

departure from what the court intended.

2

3. The court intended to deny reopening any depositions.

3

SO ORDERED.

4

Dated: August 2, 2017

5
6
HOWARD R. LLOYD
United States Magistrate Judge

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