JOINT NOTICE OF EFFORTS TO MEET AND CONFER

YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS, District Judge.

On January 29, 2013, the Court held a hearing on Defendants' Motion for Sanctions [Doc. #68] filed against CAIR-California ("CAIR-CA") based upon CAIR-CA's purported failure to provide a 30(b)(6) witness as ordered by the Court. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court instructed Counsel for Defendants and Counsel for CAIR-CA to meet in-person and to discuss what subjects Defendants still needed CAIR-CA to provide testimony on. Counsel for Defendants and for CAIR-CA met for nearly two hours following the hearing.

A. Subjects for Further Inquiry

Defendants identified two topics that are within the scope of the Court's October 17, 2012 Order that additional testimony from a CAIR-CA designated witness is needed. First, Defendants need CAIR-CA to testify to its non-privileged, relevant communications with the EEOC during the EEOC's investigation and conciliation process, including the offer of reinstatement. Second, Defendants requested that CAIR-CA provide testimony regarding non-privileged, relevant communications with Ms. Khan regarding Abercrombie or her allegations against Abercrombie or CAIR-CA's communications regarding Ms. Khan's allegations. To further specify the communications at issue in greater detail, Defendants explained that the exhibits from Mr. Ayloush's deposition reflect statements by CAIR-CA or its representatives regarding Ms. Khan's allegations. For the statements reflected in the exhibits, Defendants are interested in whether the statement was made based upon information provided to CAIR-CA by Ms. Khan or by Abercrombie.

B. Process for Obtaining Testimony

Defendant had envisioned that CAIR-CA would provide a designated witness for deposition. However, Counsel for CAIR-CA suggested that many of the subjects could be easily addressed by CAIR-CA in a sworn declaration or affidavit rather than through another deposition. Given that Defendants have already expended time and resources on a deposition, both parties agreed that CAIR-CA will provide written sworn testimony in response to specific questions identified by Abercrombie. Counsel discussed a process whereby Abercrombie would provide within 7 days written questions to CAIR-CA addressing specific matters related to the above-described topics. CAIR-CA would provide answers in writing and under oath by an adequate representative 14 days thereafter. Ideally, CAIR-CA's written answers would be sufficient and would avoid the need for a deposition. However, given the limitations of written testimony, Abercrombie reserves the right to take the deposition if still necessary after Defendants have received CAIR-CA's written responses, and have met and conferred with CAIR-CA regarding any outstanding issues, in the event that CAIR-CA's written responses were inadequate, unclear, or incomplete. CAIR-CA reserves the right to seek the Court's protection if CAIR-CA believes that Defendants' attempt is not necessary and after the parties meet and confer.