Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03322/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03322-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal

---

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

Case No. 4:15-cv-03322-EMC

FIRST LOOK STIPULATION RE: DEFENDANT’S DEPOSITION SUBPOENAS

GREGORY C. CHENG, State Bar No. 226865

gregory.cheng@ogletreedeakins.com

RACHEL J. MOROSKI, State Bar No. 286805

rachel.moroski@ogletreedeakins.com

OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.

Steuart Tower, Suite 1300

One Market Plaza

San Francisco, CA 94105

Telephone: 415.442.4810

Facsimile: 415.442.4870

Attorneys for Defendant

DIALYSIS NEWCO, INC.

DAVID SARNOFF, State Bar No. 239363

dsarnoff@sarnofflaw.com

MARIA BOURN, State Bar No. 269322

mbourn@sarnofflaw.com

SARNOFF + SARNOFF

601 California Street, Suite 1300

San Francisco, CA 94108

Telephone: 415.788.0888

Facsimile: 415.788.0688

Attorneys for Plaintiff

JANET NECHALDAS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JANET NECHALDAS, an individual,

Plaintiff,

v.

DIALYSIS NEWCO, INC., a Delaware

Corporation; and DOES 1-100, inclusive,

Defendant.

Case No. 4:15-cv-03322-EMC

FIRST LOOK STIPULATION RE:

DEFENDANT’S DEPOSITION

SUBPOENAS

Complaint Filed: June 2, 2015

Trial Date: February 13, 2017

Case 3:15-cv-03322-EMC Document 22 Filed 02/24/16 Page 1 of 4
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 Case No. 4:15-cv-03322-EMC

FIRST LOOK STIPULATION RE: DEFENDANT’S DEPOSITION SUBPOENAS

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff Janet Nechaldas (“Plaintiff”) and

Defendant Dialysis Newco, Inc. (“Defendant”), through their respective attorneys of record, that

the following Stipulation be entered as an Order by the Court to give effect to the stipulations set

forth below:

1. WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed a civil action on June 2, 2015 alleging claims for:

(1) disability discrimination in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”);

(2) failure to provide reasonable accommodation in violation of the FEHA; (3) failure to engage in

the interactive process in violation of the FEHA; (4) retaliation in violation of the FEHA;

(5) violation of the California Family Rights Act (“CFRA”); (6) retaliation in violation of CFRA;

(7) failure to prevent discrimination and retaliation in violation of the FEHA; and (8) unfair

competition in violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200 et seq.

2. WHEREAS, Plaintiff’s alleged disability and related claims are based in part on her

carpal tunnel syndrome.

3. WHEREAS, Plaintiff further alleges damages based upon symptoms of emotional

distress as a result of Defendant’s alleged unlawful conduct. Plaintiff also alleges that her

termination aggravated her previously existing diabetes.

4. WHEREAS, on December 16, 2015, Plaintiff served initial disclosures pursuant to

Rule 26(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, wherein Plaintiff identified the following

medical providers as individuals likely to have discoverable information: Dr. Michael Carl Meehan

(Kaiser Vallejo), Dr. Adrian Roxas Nguyen (Kaiser Vallejo), Mary Tong (Kaiser Vallejo), Spencer

Wang (Kaiser Vallejo), and Dr. Marta Goicoechea (Kaiser San Diego).

5. WHEREAS, based on Plaintiff’s allegations and initial disclosure statement,

Defendant issued subpoenas to Plaintiff’s medical providers at Kaiser Vallejo and Kaiser San

Diego on December 22, 2015, requesting the production of records related to any medical

diagnosis, psychiatric diagnosis, counseling, treatment and/or examination of Plaintiff. Attached

hereto as Exhibit A, is a true and correct copy of Defendant’s subpoenas.

6. WHEREAS, on or around December 30, 2015, Plaintiff’s attorneys objected to the

timing of the subpoenas, on the grounds that they have a month long trial starting January 5, 2016.

Case 3:15-cv-03322-EMC Document 22 Filed 02/24/16 Page 2 of 4
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 Case No. 4:15-cv-03322-EMC

FIRST LOOK STIPULATION RE: DEFENDANT’S DEPOSITION SUBPOENAS

Plaintiff’s attorneys further objected to the scope of the subpoenas on the grounds that the

subpoenas sought medical records that were neither directly relevant nor essential to the resolution

of this action and therefore in violation of Plaintiff’s right of privacy. The Parties thereafter met

and conferred at length to determine a mutually acceptable modification to the timing and scope of

the subpoenas.

7. WHEREAS, pursuant to Plaintiff’s request and in accordance with this Court’s prior

Order in Chaunci Boykin v. United Parcel Service, Inc. (Case No. C-08-4870 MMC (EMC)), the

Parties agreed to adopt a “first-look” procedure concerning the production of Plaintiff’s medical

records. This procedure provided that the medical records would first be sent to Plaintiff’s counsel.

Counsel for Plaintiff would then review the produced records and deliver to Defendant all records

to which she had no objection. At the same time, Plaintiff would provide a “privacy log” for any

withheld documents. This privacy log was to include: (1) the page number of any page not

produced; (2) the general nature of the information being withheld (i.e., sufficiently specific to

allow meaningful argument by the parties and review by the Court in connection with any motion);

and (3) the specific basis for Plaintiff’s objections to producing the information being withheld.

8. WHEREAS, Defendant directed its subpoena vendor, Nationwide Process Service

Department, to deliver the medical records from Kaiser Vallejo and Kaiser San Diego directly to

Plaintiff’s counsel.

9. WHEREAS, Plaintiff’s counsel agrees to produce the medical records to

Defendant’s counsel on February 26, 2016. At the same time, Plaintiff will provide a “privacy log”

for any withheld documents as described above.

10. WHEREAS, if Defendant’s counsel contests any privacy objection or privilege

asserted by Plaintiff, Defendant will serve by e-mail written objection to Plaintiff’s counsel within

five (5) days from receipt of any privacy log.

11. WHEREAS, by stipulating to this procedure, Defendant does not waive its right to

compel production of the subpoenaed documents. Nonetheless, Defendant will agree by this

stipulation to follow the procedure for resolving disputes related to the subpoenas covered by this

stipulation that are described in Paragraph 13 below.

Case 3:15-cv-03322-EMC Document 22 Filed 02/24/16 Page 3 of 4
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

3 Case No. 4:15-cv-03322-EMC

FIRST LOOK STIPULATION RE: DEFENDANT’S DEPOSITION SUBPOENAS

12. WHEREAS, by stipulating to this procedure, Plaintiff does not waive her right to

assert any privacy protection or privilege belonging to Plaintiff, Plaintiff’s attorneys, or any third

parties, except as provided in Paragraph 13 below.

13. The parties agree to submit joint briefing on any dispute regarding production of

subpoenaed documents covered by this stipulation, whether that be to the Court or the Court’s

assigned discovery facilitator. The parties further agree that any documents in dispute will be

submitted to the Court for in camera review. Prior to submission or any such briefing, the parties

must make a good faith attempt to meet and confer to resolve the dispute.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

DATED: January 11, 2016 SARNOFF + SARNOFF

By: /s/ Raven Sarnoff

RAVEN SARNOFF

Attorneys for Plaintiff

JANET NECHALDAS

DATED: February 23, 2016 OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK &

STEWART, P.C.

By: /s/ Rachel J. Moroski

GREGORY C. CHENG

RACHEL J. MOROSKI

Attorneys for Defendant

DIALYSIS NEWCO, INC.

IT IS SO ORDERED: 

________________________ 

EDWARD M. CHEN 

U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Edward M. Chen

Case 3:15-cv-03322-EMC Document 22 Filed 02/24/16 Page 4 of 4