Mendez v. Optio Solutions, LLC et al
ORDER denying as moot 45 Motion to File Documents Under Seal; denying 47 Motion for Discovery. The Court DENIES the Motion WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Accordingly, plaintiffs Motion to File Documents Under Seal is MOOT. The Parties have five (5) days to meet and confer, and refile their Motion with the Court on or before 10/16/2017. Failure to meet and confer in this regard will result in a waiver of plaintiffs objections. Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen S. Crawford on 10/10/2017. (acc)
la OCT I 0 PH 3: 5 f
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SARAH MENDEZ, on behalf of herself
and all others similarly situated,
Case No.: 3:16-cv-01882-AJB-KSC
ORDER DENYING JOINT MOTION
WITHOUT PREJUDICE [Doc. No. 47)
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL
AS MOOT [Doc. No. 45]
OPTIO SOLUTIONS, LLC, dba
QUALIA COLLECTION SERVICES
Before the Court is the parties' Joint Motion for Determination of Discovery
Dispute and Motion to File Documents Under Seal. [Doc. Nos. 47, 45]. For the reasons
discussed in greater detail below, the Court DENIES the parties' Joint Motion for failure
to abide by Local Rules and this Court's Prior Order. Plaintiff's Motion to File Exhibit
Under Seal is now MOOT.
The Scheduling Order in this case states in part as follows: "All discovery motions
must be filed ... only after counsel have met and conferred and have reached an impasse
with regard to the particular issue." [Doc. No. 44, at p. 2.] Local Rule 26.l(a) also states
that: "The court will entertain no motion pursuant to Rules 26 through 37, Fed. R. Civ.
3: 16-cv-O 1882-AJB-KSC
1 P., unless counsel will have previously met and conferred concerning all disputed issues."
CivLR 26.l(a). Finally, this Court's Chambers' Rules require the parties include the
"exact response to the request by the responding party." Chambers' Rules V(D).
Here, the parties did not abide by any of the aforementioned rules. Plaintiff merely
states: "Plaintiff still maintains these [supplemental responses plaintiff received on
September 25] that change objections are deficient. On September 27, 2017, Defendant
provided for the first time a privilege log and a redaction log. Again, Plaintiff maintains
these are deficient." [Doc. No. 47-1, at p. 1]. The parties have not met and conferred to
discuss whether defendant's supplemental responses are sufficient and would obviate the
need to file the instant Motion.
The parties also did not follow this Court's Chamber's Rule V(D) by failing to
provide the Court with all responses defendants made to the contested requests.
Moreover, purely from a practical standpoint, the Court cannot now determine the
parties' dispute without the defendant's supplemental responses. [Doc. No. 47, at p. 1].
Therefore, the Court DENIES the Motion WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
Accordingly, plaintiffs Motion to File Documents Under Seal is MOOT. The Parties
have five (5) days to meet and confer, and refile their Motion with the Court on or before
October 16, 2017. Failure to meet and confer in this regard will result in a waiver of
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 10, 201 7
United States Magistrate Judge
3: 16-cv-O 1882-AJB-KSC
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?