DAVIS v. DEVANLAY RETAIL GROUP, INC., 2:11-1719 KJM CKD. (2012)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20120727750
Visitors: 3
Filed: Jul. 26, 2012
Latest Update: Jul. 26, 2012
Summary: ORDER CAROLYN K. DELANEY, Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff has filed an ex parte application for a protective order re: plaintiff's deposition. The deposition is currently noticed for August 1, 2012. Plaintiff's deposition was set, by mutual agreement of the parties, for a date that would have been after the date set for hearing (July 27, 2012) on defendant's motion for summary judgment and plaintiff's motion for class certification. Plaintiff contends that given the pending motion for summary ju
Summary: ORDER CAROLYN K. DELANEY, Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff has filed an ex parte application for a protective order re: plaintiff's deposition. The deposition is currently noticed for August 1, 2012. Plaintiff's deposition was set, by mutual agreement of the parties, for a date that would have been after the date set for hearing (July 27, 2012) on defendant's motion for summary judgment and plaintiff's motion for class certification. Plaintiff contends that given the pending motion for summary jud..
More
ORDER
CAROLYN K. DELANEY, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff has filed an ex parte application for a protective order re: plaintiff's deposition. The deposition is currently noticed for August 1, 2012. Plaintiff's deposition was set, by mutual agreement of the parties, for a date that would have been after the date set for hearing (July 27, 2012) on defendant's motion for summary judgment and plaintiff's motion for class certification. Plaintiff contends that given the pending motion for summary judgment and the June 22, 2012 cut-off of discovery related to class certification issues, her deposition should not proceed forward until after resolution of the pending motions. On July 25, 2012, by minute order, the District Court Judge continued hearing on those motions to September 14, 2012. Plaintiff has shown good cause for hearing on shortened time the motion for protective order.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The parties are directed to meet and confer regarding the issues raised in plaintiff's motion for protective order.
2. Opposition, if any, to the motion for protective order shall be filed no later than 12:00 p.m. on July 30, 2012.
3. The matter shall thereafter stand submitted.
Source: Leagle
