Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-04082/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-04082-15/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Insurance Contract

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ATMEL CORPORATION,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

ST. PAUL FIRE & MARINE

INSURANCE CO.,

Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 04-4082 SI (BZ)

FOURTH DISCOVERY ORDER

Before the court are a series of letters (which seem to

arrive daily) about ongoing discovery disputes between the

parties. The parties are reminded that discovery closed on

October 28, 2005. The court's overall impression is that the

parties are not heeding the court's admonition that they are

to work together in good faith to try to resolve, not create,

discovery disputes. Ordinarily, I would review the records of

their meet and confer sessions to try to determine why the

parties are having such difficulties and schedule one or more

telephonic conferences to try to assist them in resolving

their difficulties. Unfortunately, I will be unavailable the

Case 3:04-cv-04082-SI Document 310 Filed 11/10/05 Page 1 of 3
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

next several weeks. I will therefore rule on those requests

which seem capable of resolution on the letter briefs and

grant leave to parties to file appropriate motions on the

disputes which are not resolved in this order. As to such

disputes, the parties filing the motion shall lodge with the

motion a record of the transcript of the meet and confer

session. In the event the parties need immediate attention,

they are urged to stipulate to the appointment of a discovery

referee. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

1. Paragraph 3 of the Third Discovery Order is amended

to require by November 17, 2005 the production of documents

which predate the renewal application. 

2. St. Paul is granted leave to reopen the depositions

of Bryant, Miller and Sun for the limited purpose of

questioning these witnesses about their knowledge of the

damages alleged by Seagate in the Seagate action. St. Paul

may not re-examine the witnesses on issues that were in their

prior depositions. 

3. With respect to Atmel's search for documents

responsive to St. Paul's requests, to the extent that St. Paul

requested documents that are different from the documents

Atmel was requested to produce in the Seagate litigation and

the additional documents St. Paul requested are relevant,

Atmel should produce them or certify that it has conducted the

search required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34.

4. Atmel shall verify by November 17, 2005 its answers

to St. Paul's interrogatories. St. Paul shall lodge the

Case 3:04-cv-04082-SI Document 310 Filed 11/10/05 Page 2 of 3
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

record of the meet and confer session on this issue with the

court by November 17, 2005.

Any party wishing to file a discovery motion on an issue

discussed in a letter I have received is granted leave to do

so by November 21, 2005. Any opposition should be filed by

November 30, 2005. Any reply should be filed by December 6,

2005. The court will schedule a hearing if it deems one

necessary.

Dated: November 10, 2005

Bernard Zimmerman

United States Magistrate Judge

G:\BZALL\-REFS\ATMEL CORP\DISC4.ORDER.wpd

Case 3:04-cv-04082-SI Document 310 Filed 11/10/05 Page 3 of 3