IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
November 30, 2009
YVETTE BRAVO, PLAINTIFF,
THE UNITED STATES LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK, AND DOES 1 THROUGH 20, INCLUSIVE, DEFENDANTS.
On November 13, 2009, the undersigned issued an order and findings and recommendations regarding plaintiff's motion to compel defendant to respond to certain requests for production of documents. Dckt. No. 38. The order required defendant to produce various documents in response to plaintiff's discovery requests, and recommended that the discovery completion deadline of November 15, 2009 be extended to November 30, 2009, for the limited purpose of permitting defendant to produce the discovery at issue. Id. at 7. The court further stated that any party could file written objections to the findings and recommendations on or before November 23, 2009. Id.
On November 23, 2009, defendant filed objections to the portions of the November 13, 2009 order requiring defendant to "produce redacted documents responsive to plaintiff's Document Request Number 3 to Plaintiff's Amended Notice of Taking the Deposition of Nurse Girard," and requiring defendant to "produce redacted claims files for the last 30 claims made by SUSD employees between May 2005 and May 2006." Dckt. No. 39 at 2. Although defendant construed those portions of the November 13, 2009 order as "recommendations," they were actually orders issued pursuant to Local Rule 72-302(c)(1). Therefore, defendant's objections will be construed as a request for reconsideration by the undersigned of the portions of the November 13 order addressed in the objections. Although Local Rule 72-304(d) provides that a response to objections may be filed "within ten (10) court days after service of the objections," in light of the November 15, 2009 discovery deadline in this case, which the undersigned recommended be partially extended to November 30, 2009, the court will direct plaintiff to file a response to defendant's request for reconsideration on or before December 3, 2010.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Defendant's objections to the findings and recommendations, Dckt. No. 39, are construed as a request for reconsideration of the November 13, 2009 order, Dckt. No. 38; and
2. Plaintiff is directed to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to the request for reconsideration on or before December 3, 2010.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.