Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-02658/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-02658-20/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Other Contract

---

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

DISCOVERY ORDER—No. C-08-02658 RMW

CCL

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

E-FILED on 7/21/10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

MANDANA D. FARHANG and M.A.

MOBILE,

Plaintiffs,

v.

INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,

KHARAGPUR; TECHNOLOGY

ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND TRAINING

SOCIETY; PARTHA P. CHAKRABARTI;

PALLAB DASGUPTA; GURASHISH S.

BRAR; RAKESH GUPTA; PRAVANJAN

CHOUDHURY; SUBRAT PANDA;

ANIMESH NASKAR,

Defendants.

No. C-08-02658 RMW

DISCOVERY ORDER

[Re Docket No. 168]

Plaintiffs request an order scheduling a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f) conference and

allowing discovery to proceed. The court finds that the issues regarding the protective order and the

trade secret disclosure list should be addressed prior to commencing further discovery. Plaintiffs are

to either obtain a stipulation for a finalized protective order or file a motion with the magistrate

judge to finalize a protective order. If defendant Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur ("IIT")

feels that the trade secret disclosure list is not sufficiently specific, it must file a motion to compel a

more specific trade secret disclosure list with the magistrate judge. The court expects that these

Case 3:08-cv-02658-WHO Document 177 Filed 07/21/10 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

DISCOVERY ORDER—No. C-08-02658 RMW

CCL 2

matters will be resolved forthwith. Within ten days after these matters have been resolved, the

parties are to meet and confer regarding discovery and to submit either a joint discovery plan or, if

the parties are unable to reach agreement, each party's proposed discovery plan. 

The motion for an order scheduling a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f) conference and

allowing discovery to proceed is otherwise denied without prejudice.

DATED: 7/21/10

RONALD M. WHYTE

United States District Judge

Case 3:08-cv-02658-WHO Document 177 Filed 07/21/10 Page 2 of 2