IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
April 14, 2009
SPRINKLER FITTERS LOCAL UNION 669, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
PRO-TECH FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS, CORP., ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
Presently pending before the court are: (1) defendant's motion to compel discovery, filed March 27, 2009 (Dckt. No. 19) which set for hearing on April 22, 2009; and (2) plaintiffs' motion to quash or for protective order, filed April 1, 2009 (Dckt. No. 24) which is set for hearing on May 6, 2009. Additionally, plaintiffs have submitted an application to shorten time to for hearing a motion to compel discovery, filed April 3, 2009 (Dckt. No. 26), which seeks to schedule the hearing on that motion for April 22, 2009. The reason for seeking to shorten time request to shorten time (i.e., that the impending discovery cutoff date was April 27, 2009) is now moot. The parties have since obtained by a stipulated request an order extending the discovery cutoff date to May 29, 2009. Dckt. No. 28.*fn1 Accordingly, that request is denied and the motion will be heard on May 6, 2009.
For each discovery motion, the parties shall comply with the joint statement requirements of E.D. Cal. L. R. 37-251. The undersigned normally requires the joint statement to be filed five court days before the scheduled hearing. However, there is inadequate remaining time to do so with respect to defendant's motion to compel set for hearing on April 22, 2009. Accordingly, the parties shall file their joint statement no later than noon, three court days before the hearing, i.e. by 12:00 p.m., on April 17, 2009.
The parties shall file their joint statement as to plaintiffs' two motions, Dckt. Nos. 24 and 26, no later than noon, five court days before the scheduled hearing, i.e. by 12:00 p.m., on April 29, 2009.
In the event any hearing is rescheduled, the joint statement shall be due not later than five court days before the rescheduled hearing.
The parties are reminded of the necessity of meeting and conferring in good faith, and attempting to resolve their discovery disputes prior to preparation of their joint statement. E.D. Cal. L.R. 37-251(b), (c)(1). The joint statement on those matters that cannot be resolved informally may be organized by category, with specific discovery items attached, if appropriate, as exhibits. For each disputed category or individual item, include: (1) the specific disputed discovery category or item; (2) the response; (3) the moving party's position; and (4) the opposition. E.D. Cal. L.R. 37-251(c)(3). Do not file separate briefing. Id.
Privilege objections must comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(5). Except in extraordinary circumstances, the party claiming privilege may not submit a post-hearing privilege log. The failure properly to support a privilege objection with a privilege log may be deemed to waive it.
The moving party is responsible for filing the joint statement. The opposing party nevertheless must timely draft and submit its portion. Failure of either party to use best efforts to ensure timely filing will be cause for sanctions.
Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiffs' motion for an order shortening time, Dckt. No. 26, is DENIED; however, the motion shall be construed as plaintiffs' notice of motion to compel discovery, and is hereby scheduled for hearing on May 6, 2009.
2. The joint statement on defendant's motion to compel, Dckt. No. 19, set for hearing on April 22, 2009, shall be filed no later than 12:00 p.m., noon, on April 17, 2009.
3. The joint statements on plaintiffs' discovery motions, Dckt. Nos. 24 and 26 shall be filed no later than 12:00 p.m., noon, on April 29, 2009.
IT IS SO ORDERED.