Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-03385/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-03385-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 33:1365 Environmental Matters

---

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN BRUNO MOUNTAIN WATCH,

Plaintiff,

 v.

CYPRESS AMLOC LAND CO., et al.,

Defendants.

 /

No. C-04-03385 EDL

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME AND

SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE

The Court has received Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel and Motion to Shorten Time to hear the

motion to compel, which were filed on October 20, 2005. Plaintiff argues that the Motion to Compel

should be heard on a shortened schedule because the parties face a December 15, 2005 deadline for initial

expert disclosures and a February 20, 2006 fact discovery cutoff date. Specifically, Plaintiff seeks a

hearing on the motion to compel on November 1, 2005. On October 21, 2005, Defendants filed an

opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion to Shorten Time. Based on the impending expert disclosure deadline,

Plaintiff has shown good cause to shorten time to hear the motion to compel, but the proposed schedule is

unworkable. 

Defendants state, inter alia, that they are preparing supplemental responses to some of Plaintiff’s

discovery requests. Plaintiff responds that the supplemental responses will only address a small portion of

the discovery requests at issue in the motion. However, because service of supplemental responses will

likely have some effect on the substance of the motion to compel, Plaintiff shall re-file its motion to compel

to reflect only those discovery requests that are genuinely still at issue after the supplemental production. 

The motion to compel shall be filed no later than November 2, 2005. Defendants’ opposition to the motion

to compel shall be filed no later than November 9, 2005. Plaintiff’s reply shall be filed no later than

Case 3:04-cv-03385-EDL Document 95 Filed 10/25/05 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

November 14, 2005 at noon. A hearing is specially set for Thursday, November 17, 2005 at 3:00 p.m. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 25, 2005 

ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:04-cv-03385-EDL Document 95 Filed 10/25/05 Page 2 of 2