IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
January 12, 2009
CHRISTINE EARL, PLAINTIFF,
NIELSEN MEDIA RESEARCH, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
Motions to compel noticed by both parties are pending on the court's January 14, January 21 and February 4, 2009 law and motion calendars. The court has determined that these matters will be submitted on the papers. See Local Rule 78-230(h). Upon review of the file in this action, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Defendant's ex parte application filed January 8, 2009 is denied.
2. With respect to the motions noticed for hearing on January 14, 2009, the parties shall advise the court by letter no later than January 15, 2009 whether the discovery dispute has been resolved. No further briefing shall be entertained with respect to these motions.
3. With respect to the motions noticed for hearing on January 21 and February 4, 2009, the parties are reminded that discovery disputes should first be resolved through good faith meeting and conferring. L.R. 37-251(b). If no resolution of the disputes covered by the motions can be reached, the parties may bring the matter before this court by letter brief filed no later than February 2, 2009. The discovery disputes covered by all pending motions shall be summarized jointly by the parties in a letter brief not exceeding six pages. The joint letter brief must attest that, prior to filing the request for relief, counsel met and conferred in person and must concisely summarize those remaining issues counsel have been unable to resolve. The letter brief may cite to limited and specific legal authority only for resolution of the dispositive issues. The letter brief may not be accompanied by exhibits or affidavits; any excerpt of disputed discovery material must be set out verbatim in the letter. After receipt of the letter brief, the court will then advise the parties concerning whether additional briefing or a telephonic conference will be necessary.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.