Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-02316/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-02316-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

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

BETSY TAUB,

Plaintiff,

v

FLEISHMAN-HILLARD, INC et al,

Defendants. /

No C-04-2316 VRW

ORDER

On October 21, 2005, plaintiff Betsy Taub (“Taub”) and

defendant Fleishman-Hillard, Inc (“Fleishman-Hillard”) jointly

asked the court to reopen discovery because of documents that Taub

produced after discovery had closed in July 2005. Doc #80. 

Apparently, Taub would like to offer some of these documents into

evidence at trial and Fleishman-Hillard would like to review these

documents and depose Taub about their contents. Id.

Because the court has yet to issue its ruling on

Fleishman-Hillard’s July 11, 2005, motion for summary judgment, the

court denies this motion without prejudice. If appropriate, the

parties may once again request that the court reopen discovery

after the court issues its summary judgment order.
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

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 

VAUGHN R WALKER

United States District Chief Judge