Filed: Jan. 27, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 27, 2020
Summary: ORDER RE DEFENDANT'S AMENDED SEPARATE STATEMENT RE DISCOVERY DISPUTE Re: Dkt. No. 37. SUSAN ILLSTON , District Judge . Having reviewed Defendant Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco's Amended Separate Statement Regarding Discovery Dispute, the Court finds as follows: 1. Defendant's Interrogatories: In accordance with the parties' meet and confer proposal, plaintiff Brian Rogers shall provide (a) further responses to defendant's interrogatories numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 1
Summary: ORDER RE DEFENDANT'S AMENDED SEPARATE STATEMENT RE DISCOVERY DISPUTE Re: Dkt. No. 37. SUSAN ILLSTON , District Judge . Having reviewed Defendant Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco's Amended Separate Statement Regarding Discovery Dispute, the Court finds as follows: 1. Defendant's Interrogatories: In accordance with the parties' meet and confer proposal, plaintiff Brian Rogers shall provide (a) further responses to defendant's interrogatories numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12..
More
ORDER RE DEFENDANT'S AMENDED SEPARATE STATEMENT RE DISCOVERY DISPUTE
Re: Dkt. No. 37.
SUSAN ILLSTON, District Judge.
Having reviewed Defendant Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco's Amended Separate Statement Regarding Discovery Dispute, the Court finds as follows:
1. Defendant's Interrogatories: In accordance with the parties' meet and confer proposal, plaintiff Brian Rogers shall provide (a) further responses to defendant's interrogatories numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 15, 16, and 17 and (b) an amended response to interrogatory number 13, limited to the period from 1998 to the present, no later than February 10, 2020.
2. Defendant's Requests for Admission: In light of the Court's November 25, 2019 Order at docket number 29, the Court finds defendant's requests for admission (set one) outside the scope of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1).
3. Defendant's Requests for Production: Plaintiff Brian Rogers shall respond to defendant's request for production numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10 no later than February 10, 2020. The Court finds request for production number 6 outside the scope of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1).
The Court DENIES defendant's request to proceed with a motion to compel discovery responses, finding it not yet ripe. The Court also is not inclined to revise the current deadline for the parties to move for summary judgment.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
