Alden v. AECOM Technology Corporation et al

Filing 111

DISCOVERY ORDER FOLLOWING JANUARY 30, 2020 STATUS CONFERENCE; resolving 103 Motion to Continue. See order for specific discovery action items and deadlines. Further Status Conference set for 2/21/2020 10:00 AM in San Jose, Courtroom 6, 4th Floor before Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen. Signed by Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen on 1/30/2020.(svklc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/30/2020)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

PETER ANGELO ALDEN,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10
11

Case No. 18-cv-03258-SVK

v.
AECOM TECHNOLOGY
CORPORATION, et al.,

DISCOVERY ORDER FOLLOWING
JANUARY 30, 2020 STATUS
CONFERENCE
Re: Dkt. No. 103

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Defendants.
12
13

Following receipt of Defendant AECOM Technology Corporation’s motion to enlarge

14

certain discovery deadlines set in the Court’s December 10, 2019 Case Management Order and the

15

response of Plaintiff Peter Alden thereto (Dkt. 103, 104), the Court held a telephonic status

16

conference on January 30, 2020. The Court will hold a further status conference on February 21,

17

2020 at 10:00 a.m. The status conference will be held by telephone unless the Court determines

18

following receipt of the February 12, 2020 submissions identified below that the parties must

19

appear in person.

20

Plaintiff confirmed that he has produced all documents he is required to produce under

21

General Order (“GO”) 71. Defendant has not yet produced all initial disclosure documents for the

22

enlarged time period, as discussed in Dkt. 102, which were due by January 17, 2020. In particular,

23

Defendant has not produced email communications and needs to confirm that all other categories

24

have been produced.

25
26

As discussed at the status conference, the Court ORDERS as follows
•

Defendant’s GO 71 Production: Defendant is ordered to review its production to

27

date to confirm that it has made a full and complete production of all documents it

28

is required to produce under GO 71 (with the exception of documents identified in

1

Part 2, subsection (2)(a) of GO 71) for the complete and enlarged time period set

2

forth in the Court’s December 10, 2019 Case Management Order (Dkt. 102). By

3

February 12, 2020, Defendant must either confirm in writing to Plaintiff that such

4

production is complete or complete the production.

5
6
7

•

ESI Search: For the initial ESI search necessary for Defendant’s compliance with
Part 2, subsection 2(a) of GO 71, Defendant must search the following:
o Custodians: Defendant must search the following custodians: Tom Horan,

8

Greg Altberg, Fred Jones, Greg Hite, Ron Schaefer, Larry Singer, and Craig

9

Martin.
o Search terms: Defendant must conduct ESI searches of the foregoing

11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

custodians using the following search terms, to be formatted using

12

appropriate search terminology:

13

•

Pete! and Alden

14

•

Alden (without limitation)

15

•

Complain! and (Pete! or Alden)

16

•

Terminat! and (Pete! or Alden)

17

•

Retaliat! and (Pete! or Alden)

18

•

(CAD and standard!) and Alden

19

o Email domains: By February 12, 2020, Defendant must file a declaration

20

from a person with relevant knowledge at AECOM and signed under

21

penalty of perjury that explains whether AECOM is able to access email

22

from the following four domains: aecom.com; dmjm.com; nasa.gov; and

23

mail.arc.nasa.gov. If AECOM does not have access to any of these

24

domains, the declaration must explain the circumstances.

25

o By February 12, 2020, Defendant must provide a status report concerning

26

information developed from the searches of the custodians and search terms

27

identified above, including: (1) an estimate of how long it will take to

28

complete this ESI search and production; (2) any initial information about
2

1

the quantity of documents located in the search; and (3) a description of any

2

problems with conducting the ESI search identified above.
o Based on the information currently available to the Court, the Court

3
4

believes the foregoing ESI custodians and search terms are adequate in this

5

case. However, following completion of initial ESI production, Plaintiff

6

may seek additional ESI custodians and/or search terms if he can

7

demonstrate that a broader search is necessary and appropriate under

8

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1) (“Parties may obtain discovery

9

regarding any nonprivileged matter is relevant to any party’s claim or
defense and proportional to the needs of the case, considering the

11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

importance of the issues at stake in the action, the amount in controversy,

12

the parties’ relative access to relevant information, the parties’ resources,

13

the importance of discovery in resolving the issues, and whether the burden

14

or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit”) and

15

26(b)(2)(B) (setting forth specific limitations on ESI discovery), as well as

16

this District’s ESI guidelines and any relevant agreements between the

17

parties.
o This order does not limit Plaintiff’s ability to seek the production of

18
19

additional categories of documents by serving requests for production that

20

comply with federal and local rules.

21

•

Protective Order: By February 7, 2020, Defendant must send a proposed

22

protective order to Plaintiff and submit it to the Court. By February 12, 2020,

23

Plaintiff must file a letter with the Court identifying any concerns he has with

24

Defendant’s draft protective order. The Court directs the parties to this District’s

25

model protective order for standard litigation for guidance

26

(https://cand.uscourts.gov/wp-content/uploads/forms/model-protective-

27

orders/CAND_StandardProtOrd.pdf).

28

•

ESI Order: By February 12, 2020, Defendant must send a proposed ESI order to
3

1

Plaintiff and submit it to the Court. The ESI order should identify custodians,

2

search terms, and domain names. It should also set forth an agreed-upon format for

3

production of ESI and include the clawback provision at section 8 of this District’s

4

model ESI order for standard litigation. By February 18, 2020, Plaintiff must file

5

a letter with the Court identifying any concerns he has with Defendant’s draft ESI

6

order.

7

Except for the upcoming filings discussed above, any future discovery disputes must be

8

presented to the Court in joint letter format in compliance with the undersigned’s Civil Scheduling

9

and Discovery Standing Order.
This order resolves Defendant’s motion to enlarge discovery deadlines. Dkt. 103.

11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

SO ORDERED.

12

Dated: January 30, 2020

13
14
SUSAN VAN KEULEN
United States Magistrate Judge

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4