IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 21, 2010
DIANE ADOMA, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
THE UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX, INC. ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows United States Magistrate Judge
Presently before the court are two amended motions to compel discovery filed by plaintiffs on August 26, 2010 (Docket #s 76 and 77.) The parties filed joint statements on September 13, 2010, and appeared telephonically for hearing on September 16, 2010. Megan Ross Hutchins appeared for plaintiffs. Jason Mills represented defendants. Having reviewed the stipulations and heard oral argument, the court now issues the following summary order.
For the reasons stated at hearing, IT IS ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiffs' motion to compel production of documents, set one, filed August 4, 2010, as amended on September 13, 2010, (dkt. #s 65, 88), is granted in part.*fn1 Within twenty-eight (28) days of this order, defendants shall produce discovery requests and responses as limited to interrogatories and requests for admission only, in the following cases: Sabol v. Apollo Group, No. 2:09CV03439-JCJ, Davis v. University of Phoenix, No. 8.09CV2971- T26AEP, Juric v. University of Phoenix, No. 09CV3214-OWD-JWJx, and Tratichita v. Apollo Group, Inc., No. 1:09CV4873. Plaintiffs shall share the costs of this production with defendants insofar as hard copy costs are involved.
2. Plaintiffs' motion to compel production of documents, set two, filed August 11, 2010, as amended on September 13, 2010, (dkt. #s 68, 89), is denied without prejudice to its renewal for good cause shown after plaintiffs have taken a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition.