Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00449/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00449-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 446
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Other
Cause of Action: 42:12101 Americans with Disabilities Act

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SCOTT JOHNSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

BASIL T. KEHOE III, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:14-cv-0449-TLN-KJN

ORDER

On December 30, 2014, the court issued an order continuing the hearing on plaintiff’s 

motion to compel (ECF No. 10) to January 29, 2015. (ECF No. 12.) The order required the 

parties to conduct a good-faith meet-and-confer session—either in person, or at a minimum, by 

telephone. (Id.) For the reasons discussed in that order, the court further directed the parties to 

file: (a) a joint statement regarding their discovery disagreement; OR (b) a notice of withdrawal 

of the motion upon informal resolution of the discovery issues; OR (c) a stipulation to conduct a 

settlement conference no later than January 22, 2015. (Id.)

Although the January 22, 2015 deadline has now passed, no joint statement regarding the 

discovery disagreement, notice of withdrawal of the motion, or stipulation to conduct a settlement 

////

////

Case 2:14-cv-00449-TLN-KJN Document 15 Filed 01/23/15 Page 1 of 2
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

conference was filed.1 Nor did plaintiff, as the moving party, file any statement as to why these 

above documents could not have been timely filed.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion to compel (ECF No. 10) is denied without prejudice for failure to 

file a joint statement regarding the discovery disagreement in accordance with the 

court’s order.

2. The January 29, 2015 hearing is vacated. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 23, 2015

 

 

 

 

1

The record indicates that the assigned district judge issued a minute order scheduling a 

settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Brennan. (ECF No. 13.) Because the parties did 

not file a stipulation to a settlement conference on the record, it is unclear whether the district 

judge set a settlement conference based on the parties’ request or on his own motion. 

Case 2:14-cv-00449-TLN-KJN Document 15 Filed 01/23/15 Page 2 of 2