Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-05031/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-05031-6/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 1

 Plaintiff’s responses are found at Docket Nos. 50-52 and 57.

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VLADIMIR JEFFERSON,

Plaintiff,

 v.

COUNTY OF NAPA, et al,

Defendants. /

No. C 03-5031 SI

ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S DEPOSITION

The Court has reviewed plaintiffs’ various letters filed in response to the Court’s September 4,

2007 order.1 The Court directed plaintiff to file a declaration from Mr. Jefferson’s treating physician

regarding Mr. Jefferson’s treatment, including the type of treatment, its duration, and when Mr.

Jefferson can be expected to be able to attend a deposition. The Court also directed plaintiff to file a

supplemental letter brief regarding whether there are any individuals (such as other relatives) who could

attend Vladimir’s deposition in lieu of Mr. Jefferson

The Court finds plaintiff’s response deficient. None of the information provided establishes that

Mr. Jefferson is currently unable to attend a deposition of his son. Similarly, plaintiff’s counsel asserts,

without any explanation, that there are no other adults who could attend Vladimir’s deposition in Mr.

Jefferson’s stead. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that the deposition of Vladimir Jefferson take place

no later than October 12, 2007. If Mr. Jefferson wishes to attend the deposition he may; if Mr.

Jefferson is unable to attend, the deposition shall proceed nevertheless.

As discussed in several previous orders, the Ninth Circuit’s remand has made Vladimir’s

Case 3:03-cv-05031-SI Document 58 Filed 09/25/07 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

testimony highly relevant, and defendants need to take Vladimir’s deposition in order to file dispositive

motions and prepare for trial. The Court will not countenance any further delays with regard to

Vladimir’s deposition. Accordingly, plaintiff is cautioned that the failure to comply with this order will

result in the imposition of issue preclusion sanctions. The revised schedule for filing dispositive

motions is as follows: (1) dispositive motions shall be filed no later than October 26, 2007; (2)

oppositions shall be filed no later than November 9, 2007; (3) replies shall be filed no later than

November 16, 2007; and (4) the hearing is scheduled for November 30, 2007 at 9:00 a.m. The

remaining pretrial dates as set forth in the August 7, 2007 Pretrial Preparation Order remain the same.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 25, 2007 

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:03-cv-05031-SI Document 58 Filed 09/25/07 Page 2 of 2