City of Lindsay v. Sociedad Quimica Y Minera De Chile, S.A., 1:11-cv-00046-DAD-EPG. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20180911628
Visitors: 32
Filed: Sep. 10, 2018
Latest Update: Sep. 10, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR LIMITED LIFTING OF STAY OF DISCOVERY ERICA P. GROSJEAN , Magistrate Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between Plaintiff City of Lindsay ("the City") and Defendant SQM North America Corporation ("SQMNA"), by and through their undersigned attorneys of record, as follows: 1. The pending stay of this action (dkt # 86) may be lifted for the limited and sole purpose of enforcing a subpoena issued by SQMNA to the University of Illinois, which is the subject of a su
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR LIMITED LIFTING OF STAY OF DISCOVERY ERICA P. GROSJEAN , Magistrate Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between Plaintiff City of Lindsay ("the City") and Defendant SQM North America Corporation ("SQMNA"), by and through their undersigned attorneys of record, as follows: 1. The pending stay of this action (dkt # 86) may be lifted for the limited and sole purpose of enforcing a subpoena issued by SQMNA to the University of Illinois, which is the subject of a sub..
More
STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR LIMITED LIFTING OF STAY OF DISCOVERY
ERICA P. GROSJEAN, Magistrate Judge.
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between Plaintiff City of Lindsay ("the City") and Defendant SQM North America Corporation ("SQMNA"), by and through their undersigned attorneys of record, as follows:
1. The pending stay of this action (dkt # 86) may be lifted for the limited and sole purpose of enforcing a subpoena issued by SQMNA to the University of Illinois, which is the subject of a subpoena enforcement action in the Northern District of Illinois (SQM North America Corporation, Petitioner, v. University of Illinois, Subpoena Respondent, Northern District of Illinois Case No.: 1:12-cv-2950).
2. The stipulation for a limited lifting of the stay is based on the following Minute Order by the Northern District of Illinois, dated August 21, 2018, which directed SQMNA to seek such relief:
The court entered an order asking Respondent University of Illinois to explain if there are costs and burden to it by having this matter pending for so long. (R. 44.) In response, Respondent answered that "[t]he pendency of this subpoena has . . . caused the University to incur substantial internal administrative costs including relating to storage, consultations with in-house counsel, administrative work in sequestering and retaining the information requested and the like. However, those costs have not been quantified, nor would they be easily quantifiable." (R. 45 at 2.) Rule 45(d) requires Petitioner SQM North America Corporation and the court to "take reasonable steps to avoid imposing undue burden or expense on" Respondent. After more than six years of dormancy, the time has come to fish or cut bait. Petitioner is ordered to file an amended motion to compel by September 28, 2018. This period of time is sufficient for Petitioner to prepare its amended motion to compel and to seek relief in the underlying case for an exception to the general discovery stay for purposes of enforcing its subpoena in this district. Respondent then has until October 19, 2018, to file its response and Petitioner has until October 26, 2018, to file its reply thereto. (Emphasis added.)
3. Other than lifting the stay for this limited and sole purpose, the parties agree and request that the stay of the litigation ought to remain in place.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
