Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-00585/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-00585-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 710
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Fair Labor Standards

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GERLACH, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 vs.

WELLS FARGO & CO., et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 05-0585 CW (MEJ)

ORDER RE: PENDING DISCOVERY

DISPUTES

The Court is in receipt of the parties' joint letter, filed February 16, 2006. Doc #197. In their

letter, the parties seek clarification as to how best to proceed on three pending discovery disputes:

(1) Defendants' responses to Plaintiffs' First Set of Requests for Production of Documents; (2)

Defendants' invocation of the attorney-client privilege log and its privilege logs; and (3) whether

certain e-mails produced by Defendants are privileged and should be returned. Upon review of the

parties' letter, the Court finds that the three disputes would best be resolved via separate joint letters

for each dispute. Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS the parties to file a separate joint letter

for each dispute. Pursuant to the undersigned's Discovery Standing Order, the parties shall attach all

relevant requests for production and responses, including privilege logs, to each joint letter. As to

the disputed e-mails, Defendants shall submit the e-mails for in camera review at the time the parties

file their joint letters. 

In their February 16 letter, the parties request that the Court first address the dispute

regarding the privileged status of the e-mails given that those e-mails may arise in discussing other

Case 4:05-cv-00585-CW Document 198 Filed 02/21/06 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

discovery disputes before the Court. Given this request, it is unclear whether the parties wish to file

simultaneous letters on all three disputes or if an order is required on the e-mail dispute before they

file letters on the remaining disputes. Thus, the parties may choose to file all three letters

simultaneously or file only the e-mail letter and await the Court's order on that issue prior to filing

the remaining letters. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 21, 2006 

MARIA-ELENA JAMES

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:05-cv-00585-CW Document 198 Filed 02/21/06 Page 2 of 2