Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_10-cv-05105/USCOURTS-cand-3_10-cv-05105-28/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA RIVER WATCH,

Plaintiffs,

v.

FLUOR CORPORATION,

Defendant.

Case No. 10-cv-05105-WHO 

ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY 

DISPUTES

Re: Dkt. Nos. 275, 276, 279, 280, 284

Fluor Corporation and The Shiloh Group presented several discovery disputes on 

September 29 and 30 for my determination. I held a telephonic hearing on October 6, 2015, and 

for the reasons discussed during the hearing ORDER as follows:

1. TSG may depose Fluor’s Rule 30(b)(6) witness for no more than 12 hours over two 

days. Dkt. No. 275.

2. TSG’s request to compel further responses to its interrogatories is DENIED, except 

that Fluor shall provide a verified response regarding the six documents identified by 

TSG during the hearing that Fluor is unable to locate. Dkt. No. 276.

3. The agreements recited in the Joint Status Report regarding Fluor’s RFP No. 8, 10 and

26, and its Interrogatories to TSG/Ms. Sales are adopted by the Court to resolve those 

disputes. Dkt. No. 284.

4. Fluor may take the deposition of Mr. Ortega of Kadon Trucking as noticed. Dkt. Nos. 

279,280. 

5. TSG shall provide complete responses to Fluor’s RFP No. 28, as limited by Fluor’s 

counsel during the hearing, or verify that no further documents exist. Dkt. Nos. 

Case 3:10-cv-05105-WHO Document 286 Filed 10/08/15 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

279,280.

6. TSG shall produce its Operating Agreement that was in effect when TSG acquired the 

property at issue pursuant to the Protective Order with the further condition that only 

Mr. Donnelly and Mr. Corbett, his associate, may review it absent further agreement or 

Court order. Dkt. Nos. 279,280.

Unless otherwise indicated above, all other requests are denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 8, 2015

______________________________________

WILLIAM H. ORRICK

United States District Judge

Case 3:10-cv-05105-WHO Document 286 Filed 10/08/15 Page 2 of 2