Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_02-cv-01486/USCOURTS-cand-4_02-cv-01486-57/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 850
Nature of Suit: Securities, Commodities, Exchange
Cause of Action: 15:78m(a) Securities Exchange Act

---

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

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

In re: JDS UNIPHASE CORPORATION

SECURITIES LITIGATION

 

This document relates to ALL ACTIONS

 /

No. C-02-1486 CW (EDL)

ORDER GRANTING JDS UNIPHASE’S

MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER

Upon consideration of all the papers on Defendant JDSU’s motion for protective order, the

Court concludes that the matter is suitable for decision without oral argument. For the reasons stated

in JDSU’s papers, especially in its reply, the Court grants the motion for a protective order pursuant

to Rule 26(b)(2). Among other things, the Court notes that the following factors weigh in favor of a

protective order: the Court required the parties to exchange lists of intended deponents in order to

have an orderly schedule; Plaintiffs removed from their list of intended deponents a Rule 30(b)(6)

deponent on inventory which had been included on an initial list, and did not reinstate the deposition

in several updated lists of depositions; Plaintiffs only attempted to reinstate such a deposition on

November 10, 2006, shortly before the deposition cutoff; the notice served on November 15 for a

November 28, 2006 deposition, with the intervening Thanksgiving holiday, was insufficient,

particularly when combined with the absence of current employees knowledgeable about the subject

and the fact that Plaintiff had already taken depositions of former JDSU employees, such as Mr.

Lefebvre, who were likely to have been willing to appear, if they had only been required to sit once,

consecutively, as was no longer possible.

//

//

Case 4:02-cv-01486-CW Document 771 Filed 12/22/06 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

2

JDSU’s motion for protective order is GRANTED. (Docket no. 695.)

The hearing set for January 9, 2007 on the motion for protective order is VACATED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 22, 2006 

ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:02-cv-01486-CW Document 771 Filed 12/22/06 Page 2 of 2