Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-00882/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-00882-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrimination

---

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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LAURA NARANJO,

Plaintiff,

v.

WAL-MART STORES, INC.,

Defendant.

No. 2:15-cv-0882 KJM CKD

ORDER

Pending before the court is plaintiff’s motion to compel further discovery responses. 

Because oral argument is not of material assistance, this matter is submitted on the briefs. E.D. 

Cal. L.R. 230(g). Upon review of the documents in support and opposition, and good cause 

appearing therefor, THE COURT ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:

1. The motion to compel (ECF No. 11) is granted in part and denied in part. 

2. Within twenty-one days from the date of this order, defendant shall provide further 

responses, without objection, to interrogatories nos. 9-15, limited to stores located in Lodi, 

Stockton, Galt, Manteca, Elk Grove, Tracy, Antioch, Modesto, Livermore, Ceres, Sacramento, 

Pleasanton, Patterson, San Ramon, and Turlock.

3. Within twenty-one days from the date of this order, defendant shall provide, for 

inspection and copying, documents responsive to requests for production, nos. 11, 31 (limited to 

e-mail custodians Michelle Rau, Tim Jacobson, Christina Ramirez, Rickey Robertson and Joseph 

Case 2:15-cv-00882-KJM-CKD Document 15 Filed 12/10/15 Page 1 of 2
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

Rubino), 32, 33, 34, 39, 40, 41, 42, 45, and 46. Considering the proportionality of the document 

requests to the needs of the case and the other factors set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 

26(b)(1), the motion to compel document requests nos. 35-38, 43, 44, 47, 48, 50 and 51 is denied 

without prejudice. Plaintiff may renew the motion to compel with respect to these document 

requests upon a subsequent showing that factors not shown on the present motion or that changed 

circumstances weigh in favor of plaintiff.

Dated: December 10, 2015

4 naranjo0882.mtc.subm

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:15-cv-00882-KJM-CKD Document 15 Filed 12/10/15 Page 2 of 2