Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-03365/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-03365-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights 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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID DAVIS, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

CLEARLAKE POLICE DEPT.,

Defendant. /

No. C-07-03365 EDL

ORDER GRANTING IN PART

PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO COMPEL

On January 22, 2008, Plaintiffs, who are pro se, filed a motion to compel production of

documents and for discovery to begin. Defendants opposed the motion on the ground that it was

premature because the parties had not met and conferred as required by Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 26(f), and had not served initial disclosures, although they were supposed to be served by

December 31, 2007. On March 4, 2008, the Court held a hearing on Plaintiffs’ motion.

At the hearing, Defendants’ counsel represented that Defendants had recently sent their

initial disclosures to Plaintiffs. Therefore, there is no impediment to the commencement of

discovery. 

With respect to Plaintiffs’ discovery requests for police personnel and related records,

Plaintiffs stated at the hearing that they are particularly interested in receiving: (1) information

showing that the officers’ certifications to act as law enforcement officers are up to date; and (2)

complaints or reports of complaints, whether determined to be unfounded or not, relating to

harassment, racial profiling or other similar conduct within the last five years with respect to the

officers at issue. As discussed at the hearing, Defendants’ counsel shall review the relevant

Case 3:07-cv-03365-EDL Document 37 Filed 03/06/08 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

personnel and/or complaint/internal affairs files for responsive material, including but not limited to

certifications and complaints sought by Plaintiffs, and shall provide a written response to Plaintiffs’

discovery no later than March 11, 2008. No later than March 25, 2008, Defendants shall produce

discoverable material and provide Plaintiffs with a privilege log describing the documents that have

been withheld. The parties shall then meet and confer regarding the withheld documents and if a

dispute remains regarding production of those documents, the parties shall file a joint letter

concisely setting forth their positions on whether the withheld documents should be released and

shall lodge a limited number of disputed documents for the Court’s in camera review. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 6, 2008 

ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:07-cv-03365-EDL Document 37 Filed 03/06/08 Page 2 of 2