Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-02351/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-02351-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition For Removal--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

1

 This is particularly true, given the recent postponement of the preliminary injunction

hearing set before Judge Fogel. 

*E-filed 9/5/07*

NOT FOR CITATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

ADIBA MAHROOM and MAJID MAHROOM, 

Plaintiffs,

v.

BEST WESTERN INTERNATIONAL, INC., 

Defendant.

 /

Case No. C07-02351 HRL

INTERIM ORDER RE: MOTIONS FOR

PROTECTIVE ORDERS

After reviewing the papers submitted by the parties, the court remains unclear about the

status of the discovery proceedings.1 Accordingly, both parties shall file a document which

responds to the following by 12:00 p.m. on Monday, September 10, 2007.

• What depositions have been taken as of September 10, 2007?

• What depositions, necessary for the preliminary injunction hearing, remain to be taken? 

• Have they been noticed? 

• If so, then: 

• which depositions? at what location? on what date? 

• Have objections been raised to these noticed depositions? If so, describe

those objections briefly.

//

Case 5:07-cv-02351-JF Document 87 Filed 09/05/07 Page 1 of 3
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

If there remain depositions to be taken prior to the injunction hearing which have yet to

be noticed, list them. Then, present a proposal for taking these depositions. Include in the

proposal all available proposed dates, times and locations, as well as any other relevant

information. 

The parties may file this document separately, but are strongly encouraged to do so

jointly. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 9/5/07 

HOWARD R. LLOYD

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 5:07-cv-02351-JF Document 87 Filed 09/05/07 Page 2 of 3
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

3

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT A COPY OF THIS NOTICE WILL BE SENT TO:

Antony E. Buchignani antony.buchignani@dlapiper.com, laverne.patane@dlapiper.com 

John C. Gorman jgorman@gormanmiller.com 

Jeffrey Mark Hamerling jeffrey.hamerling@dlapiper.com 

Allison L. Harvey allison.harvey@dlapiper.com 

Rachel Elizabeth King Lowe rachel.lowe@dlapiper.com 

Cynthia A. Ricketts cindy.ricketts@dlapiper.com, kathy.sieckman@dlapiper.com 

Charles Joseph Stiegler cstiegler@gormanmiller.com 

Counsel are responsible for transmitting this order to co-counsel who have not signed

up for e-filing.

Dated: 9/5/07

 /s/ KRO 

Chambers of Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd

Case 5:07-cv-02351-JF Document 87 Filed 09/05/07 Page 3 of 3