Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05756/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05756-18/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination

---

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

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAMUEL B JOHNSON III,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

CHEVRON CORPORATION, ET AL.,

Defendant(s).

___________________________________/

Case No. C-07-05756 SI (JCS)

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’

MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER 

[Docket No. 101] 

Defendants Chevron Corporation and the Chevron Environmental Management Company

(“Chevron”) filed a letter brief on August 4, 2008. (Docket No. 101). Plaintiff replied on August

11, 2008. (Docket No. 107). For the reasons stated below, the Court treats Chevron’s letter as a

motion for a protective order, and grants the motion in part and denies the motion in part.

Plaintiff served one set of Requests for Admission on each Defendant. Each set contained 30

requests for admission. Defendants responded. Subsequently, Plaintiff served nine (9) more sets of

Requests for Admission, totaling 226 additional Requests for Admission addressed to each

defendant. In this simple case, Plaintiff has not provided any information which would justify

serving such an extraordinary number of Requests for Admission. The submission of these Requests

for Admission is oppressive and unduly burdensome and violates Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure,

Rule 26 (c). 

Accordingly, the motion is granted in part. Defendants need not respond to the Requests for

Admission, sets two through ten, served by Plaintiff. Plaintiff may serve only one further set of

Case 3:07-cv-05756-SI Document 115 Filed 08/14/08 Page 1 of 2
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

Requests for Admission on each Defendant. Each such set shall contain more no more than ten (10)

individual Requests for Admission.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 14, 2008 _______________________________

JOSEPH C. SPERO

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:07-cv-05756-SI Document 115 Filed 08/14/08 Page 2 of 2