Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_01-cv-21151/USCOURTS-cand-3_01-cv-21151-20/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 480
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 15:1692 Fair Debt Collection Act

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

ELENA DEL CAMPO,

Plaintiff,

 v.

GEORGE KENNEDY, AMERICAN

CORRECTIVE COUNSELING SERVICES,

INC., DON R. MEALING, BRUCE D. RAYE,

LYNN R. HANSEY aka R.D. DAVIS,

Defendants. 

No. C-01-21151 JW (PVT)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’

MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME ON

MOTION TO DISPUTE

CONFIDENTIALITY DESIGNATION OF

DOCUMENTS

On February 5, 2007, Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Dispute Confidentiality Designation of

Documents and a Motion to Shorten Time for the Motion to Dispute Confidentiality. A party

seeking to change the time for a motion to be heard must identify “the substantial harm or prejudice

that would occur if the Court did not change the time.” Civ. L.R. 6-3(a)(3). Plaintiffs assert that if

the court does not shorten the time, they will be unable to share these documents with different

plaintiffs in time for those plaintiffs to submit the documents in support of a summary judgment

motion in their lawsuit pending in the Northern District of Indiana (the “Hamilton Case”). Thus,

Plaintiffs have only asserted harm to different plaintiffs in relation to a motion pending in a different

court. Plaintiffs have asserted no harm or prejudice that they will suffer in this lawsuit. 

Moreover, Plaintiffs represent that the Hamilton Plaintiffs have sought these documents in

Case 3:01-cv-21151-SI Document 317 Filed 02/09/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

their own lawsuit, but Defendants objected to producing the documents. This Court is not in a

position to evaluate whether the Hamilton Plaintiffs need these documents in relation to motions to

be heard by the Hamilton Court. The Hamilton Plaintiffs must convince the Hamilton Court that

their need for the documents warrants hearing a motion to compel on shortened time or an extension

of the summary judgement deadline. 

Accordingly, It Is Hereby Ordered that the Motion to Shorten Time is Denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 8, 2007 

PATRICIA V. TRUMBULL

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 3:01-cv-21151-SI Document 317 Filed 02/09/07 Page 2 of 2