Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_09-cv-05744/USCOURTS-cand-4_09-cv-05744-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 195
Nature of Suit: Contract Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Product Liability

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Northern District of California

MARTIN MURRAY,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

 SEARS, ROEBUCK AND CO., et al.,

Defendant(s).

_____________________________________/

No. C 09-05744 CW (MEJ)

ORDER RE: MEET & CONFER

PROCEDURE

The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff’s request, filed February 18, 2010, regarding the in-person

meet and confer requirement for discovery disputes in this case. (Dkt. #58.) Good cause appearing,

the Court hereby GRANTS Plaintiff’s request to meet and confer by telephone, as detailed below. 

So as to ensure compliance with the spirit of the meet and confer requirement, the parties shall make

a contemporaneous record of their meetings using a court reporter or electronic recording device. 

The parties should be mindful that the Court may re-instate the in-person meeting requirement if it

determines that the telephone meetings are not fruitful.

Counsel for Defendants Sears, Roebuck and Co. and Electrolux Home Products, Inc. are to

meet and confer with Counsel for Plaintiff regarding the issues presented in Plaintiff’s Motion to

Compel Defendants to Provide Initial Disclosures and Plaintiff’s Motion for a Protective Order that

were referred to this Court and ordered to comply with Judge James’ Standing Order Regarding

Discovery and Dispute Procedures by March 2, 2010. Within seven (7) calendar days of receipt by

email transmission from Plaintiff of a draft joint letter(s) addressing any remaining unresolved

discovery disputes, Defendants shall provide to Plaintiff by email transmission their portion of such

letter(s), as necessary. 

2) For purposes of any further discovery disputes in this case, the objecting or challenging

Case 4:09-cv-05744-CW Document 59 Filed 02/18/10 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

UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

party shall request in writing by email transmission three available times/dates from opposing

counsel(s) for a telephonic conference to be held within seven (7) calendar days of the date of the

request. If opposing counsel fails to timely respond by email transmission to schedule the telephonic

conference or timely participate in the telephonic conference, the requesting or challenging party

shall inform the court in writing of the deficiencies in the meet and confer process, at which time the

Court shall determine how best to proceed. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 18, 2010 _______________________________

Maria-Elena James 

Chief United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 4:09-cv-05744-CW Document 59 Filed 02/18/10 Page 2 of 2