J.T. ex rel. Wolfe v. Tehachapi Unified School District, 1:16-cv-01492-DAD-JLT. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20181129987
Visitors: 1
Filed: Nov. 28, 2018
Latest Update: Nov. 28, 2018
Summary: ORDER DROPPING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL FROM THE COURT'S CALENDAR (Doc. 72) JENNIFER L. THURSTON , Magistrate Judge . On November 27, 2018, Defendant filed a notice of motion to compel a mental examination of Plaintiff. (Doc. 72) Defendant indicated its intent to file a "Joint Statement Regarding Discovery Disagreement (to include the Parties' legal and factual arguments concerning this discovery dispute), which will be filed by the Parties with the Court in advance of the above-notice
Summary: ORDER DROPPING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL FROM THE COURT'S CALENDAR (Doc. 72) JENNIFER L. THURSTON , Magistrate Judge . On November 27, 2018, Defendant filed a notice of motion to compel a mental examination of Plaintiff. (Doc. 72) Defendant indicated its intent to file a "Joint Statement Regarding Discovery Disagreement (to include the Parties' legal and factual arguments concerning this discovery dispute), which will be filed by the Parties with the Court in advance of the above-noticed..
More
ORDER DROPPING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL FROM THE COURT'S CALENDAR
(Doc. 72)
JENNIFER L. THURSTON, Magistrate Judge.
On November 27, 2018, Defendant filed a notice of motion to compel a mental examination of Plaintiff. (Doc. 72) Defendant indicated its intent to file a "Joint Statement Regarding Discovery Disagreement (to include the Parties' legal and factual arguments concerning this discovery dispute), which will be filed by the Parties with the Court in advance of the above-noticed hearing)." (Id. at 1)
To the extent this is a discovery dispute between the parties, the filing of the motion has not been approved by the Court. As indicated in the Scheduling Order, "no written discovery motions shall be filed without the prior approval of the assigned Magistrate Judge." (Doc. 62 at 4) Parties with a discovery dispute are required to "seek a telephonic hearing with all involved parties and the Magistrate Judge" (id.), and Defendant has not attempted to schedule a conference call with the Court. Further, to the extent the motion is brought pursuant to Rule 35 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for an order to compel Plaintiff's mental examination, Defendant has not filed a properly noticed motion with an accompanying memorandum of points and authorities.
Based upon the above procedural defects, the Court ORDERS: The motion to compel (Doc. 72) is DROPPED from the Court's calendar.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
