United States District Court, E.D. California
EZELL ANDERSON, JR., Doing Business As Mom’s Choice Meats, Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; KEVIN CONCANNON, Undersecretary for Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE; JOCELYN KEH, Section Chief, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, Food and Nutrition Service, United States Department of Agriculture, and their successors in office,, Defendants.
PHILLIP A. TALBERT ACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY ALYSON A.
BERG Attorney for Defendant United States
EX PARTE REQUEST TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINE FOR
LIMITED PURPOSE OF COMPLETING PLAINTIFF’S DEPOSITION;
ORDER
CAROLYN K. DELANEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The
United States requests a brief extension of time by which
discovery is to be completed from June 15, 2016 to and
including July 22, 2016, for the limited purpose of
completing the deposition of Plaintiff, Ezell Anderson, Jr.,
based on the following:
1. The
United States’ counsel took the deposition of Plaintiff
Ezell Anderson, Jr. on May 17, 2016. Toward the end of the
deposition, a dispute arose regarding questions about a
“suggestion” made by Plaintiff in a settlement
letter.
2.
Counsel for the United States sought to resolve the dispute
at the deposition by offering Plaintiff two options. Either
Plaintiff could answer the questions about the
“suggestion, ” or maintain his refusal to discuss
the “suggestion, ” provided that, he would not
assert the “suggestion” in any future motions or
at trial. Plaintiff would not agree to either option.
3.
After the parties were unable to resolve the dispute
informally at the deposition, it was agreed that the parties
would not complete the deposition, and the United States
reserved the right to complete the deposition if Plaintiff
continued to maintain that he would not answer questions
about the “suggestion, ” and assert that such
undisclosed “suggestion” could be used in defense
of any motion or at trial.
4. Two
more efforts were made to resolve the dispute informally
after the deposition with counsel for the United States
originally sending a letter requesting the Plaintiff produce
what had been determined to be a “Form AD-287, dated
March 6, 2013. (Exhibit “A”). Plaintiff refused
to produce the requested document by the date of June 3,
2016.
5.
After Plaintiff refused to produce the document, counsel for
the United States sought to resolve the matter in a telephone
conversation with Plaintiff on June 9, 2016. During the
conversation, Plaintiff agreed to produce the document not
later than June 10, 2016. However, the document was not
produced on that date.
6.
Because the document was not produced on the agreed to date
of June 10, 2016, counsel for the United States left several
voice mail messages for Plaintiff to coordinate a date for a
Telephonic Discovery Dispute Conference with the Honorable
Judge Delaney per the standing Order.
7. No
response was made to United States’ counsel’s
repeated voicemail messages.
8. Per
letter dated June 13, 2016, counsel for the United States
advised Plaintiff that the efforts at informal resolution
were unsuccessful, and the failure to respond to
counsel’s voicemail message rendered any attempt to
comply with the Court’s Telephonic Discovery Dispute
procedures impractical. (Exhibit “B”).
9. The
Court entered a Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order on April
14, 2016. (Docket No. 46). The Order provided that non-expert
discovery be completed by June 15, 2016. However, due to
Plaintiff’s refusal to answer questions about his
“Form AD-287 dated March 6, 2103, ” and refusal
to resolve the dispute in accordance with the Court’s
Telephonic Discovery Dispute procedures (by refusing to
respond to counsel for the United States’ phone calls),
a brief extension of the discovery deadline for the limited
purpose of completing the deposition of Plaintiff is
warranted.
10.
Accordingly, the United States respectfully requests that the
Court extend the deadline for non-expert discovery to July
22, 2016, so that the United States may complete the
deposition of Plaintiff on the limited topic of the
“suggestion” as more specifically known as
“Form AD-287, dated March 6, 2013.” The United
States also requests that the Court order Plaintiff to
provide dates that he is available before July 22, 2106, to
allow for the completion of his deposition at the ...