United States District Court, N.D. California
ORDER RE DISCOVERY PROCEDURES
ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
TO ALL
PARTIES AND COUNSEL OF RECORD:
The
above matter has been referred to Magistrate Judge Elizabeth
D. Laporte. All hearing dates are subject to the availability
of Judge Laporte's calendar. You may review Judge
Laporte's calendar and scheduling information on the
District Court's website,
http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/.
DISCOVERY
DISPUTES
1.
Discovery disputes shall be addressed as follows:
A.
Discovery disputes referred from a district court judge
Discovery
disputes in cases referred by a district court judge to this
Magistrate Judge must follow either Procedure No. 1 or
Procedure No. 2, set forth below, depending on the status of
the dispute at the time of the referral by the district
court.
Procedure
No. 1:
Unless
the district court judge has ordered another procedure, in
which case that procedure should be followed upon referral,
motions filed before the district court and subsequently
referred to this magistrate judge shall maintain the original
district court briefing schedule. Upon referral, the parties
shall promptly contact Judge Laporte’s Courtroom Deputy
to re-schedule a hearing on the motion to a date on Judge
Laporte’s civil law and motion calendar. Discovery
motions are generally heard on Judge Laporte's civil law
and motion calendar on Tuesday mornings at 9:00 a.m.,
Courtroom E, 15th Floor, United States District Court, 450
Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California, 94102, in
accordance with Judge Laporte's available dates and times
for setting motions. Any party may seek an order to shorten
or enlarge time under Civil L.R. 6-3 if the circumstances
justify that relief. The Court will not consider discovery
motions unless the moving party has complied with the meet
and confer requirements of Fed.R.Civ.P. 37 and Civil L.R.
37-1(a).
Motions
to compel fact discovery must be filed within the time limits
contained in Civil Local Rule 37-3. Motions to compel expert
discovery must be filed within the time limits contained in
Civil Local Rule 37-3.
Procedure
No. 2:
Discovery
disputes which arise after the case has been referred to this
Magistrate Judge, or before a formal motion has been filed
before the district court, shall follow the procedure below:
The
counsel for each party shall meet and confer in person, or,
if counsel are located outside the Bay Area, by telephone, to
attempt to resolve their dispute informally. A mere exchange
of letters, e-mails, telephone calls or facsimile
transmissions does not satisfy the meet and confer
requirement.
If the
parties are unable to resolve their dispute informally after
a good faith effort, including meet and confer
efforts conducted by lead counsel, they shall
prepare a joint statement of not more than five pages
(12-point or greater font) stating the nature and status of
the dispute and attesting to their good faith meet and confer
efforts. Issue-by-issue, the joint letter shall describe each
unresolved issue, summarize each party’s position with
appropriate legal authority, and provide each party’s
final proposed compromise before addressing the next issue.
The joint letter should also address the proportionality
factors set for in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1).
Where necessary, the parties may submit supporting
declarations and documentation. Parties are expected to ...