Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Harper v. Charter Communications, LLC, 2:19-CV-0902-WBS-DMC. (2020)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20200128996 Visitors: 38
Filed: Jan. 27, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 27, 2020
Summary: ORDER DENNIS M. COTA , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiffs, who are proceeding with retained counsel, bring this civil action. On January 8, 2020, plaintiff Lionel Harper filed a motion to compel defendant Charter Communications, LLC, to provide further responses to requests for production 1 through 34. See ECF No. 47. Plaintiff's motion indicates that it will be supported by a "forthcoming Joint Statement of Discovery Disagreement" filed pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 2
More

ORDER

Plaintiffs, who are proceeding with retained counsel, bring this civil action. On January 8, 2020, plaintiff Lionel Harper filed a motion to compel defendant Charter Communications, LLC, to provide further responses to requests for production 1 through 34. See ECF No. 47. Plaintiff's motion indicates that it will be supported by a "forthcoming Joint Statement of Discovery Disagreement" filed pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 251. See id. Plaintiff's motion is set to be heard before the undersigned in Redding, California, on January 29, 2020, at 10:00 a.m. See id.

Under Local Rule 251(a), "[t]he hearing may be dropped from the calendar without prejudice if the Joint Statement re Discovery Disagreement or an affidavit as set forth below is not filed at least seven (7) days before the scheduled hearing date." Local Rule 251(a). Under Local Rule 251(d), an affidavit in lieu of a Joint Statement should be filed when counsel for the moving party refuses to participate in preparation of the Joint Statement. See Local Rule 251(d). Local Rule 251(e) outlines exceptions to the requirement to file either a Joint Statement of affidavit in lieu thereof. See Local Rule 251(e). Those exceptions are not applicable here because plaintiff's motion to compel does not allege a complete and total failure to respond to discovery, nor does plaintiff's motion solely concern a request for sanctions. See Local Rule 251(e). In this case, the Joint Statement or affidavit in lieu thereof was due to be filed by January 22, 2020. A review of the docket reflects that neither has been filed. Therefore, plaintiff's motion is dropped from the court's calendar, the January 29, 2020, hearing before the undersigned is vacated, and the Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate plaintiff's motion as a pending matter on the court's docket.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer