Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00902/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00902-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Account Receivable

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LIONEL HARPER, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, LLC, 

et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:19-CV-0902-WBS-DMC

ORDER

Plaintiffs, who are proceeding with retained counsel, bring this civil action. On 

January 8, 2020, plaintiff Lionel Harper filed a motion to compel defendant Charter 

Communications, LLC, to provide further responses to requests for production 1 through 34. See

ECF No. 47. Plaintiff’s motion indicates that it will be supported by a “forthcoming Joint 

Statement of Discovery Disagreement” filed pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 

251. See id. Plaintiff’s motion is set to be heard before the undersigned in Redding, California, 

on January 29, 2020, at 10:00 a.m. See id.

Under Local Rule 251(a), “[t]he hearing may be dropped from the calendar 

without prejudice if the Joint Statement re Discovery Disagreement or an affidavit as set forth 

below is not filed at least seven (7) days before the scheduled hearing date.” Local Rule 251(a). 

Under Local Rule 251(d), an affidavit in lieu of a Joint Statement should be filed when counsel 

Case 2:19-cv-00902-WBS-DMC Document 50 Filed 01/27/20 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

for the moving party refuses to participate in preparation of the Joint Statement. See Local Rule 

251(d). Local Rule 251(e) outlines exceptions to the requirement to file either a Joint Statement 

of affidavit in lieu thereof. See Local Rule 251(e). Those exceptions are not applicable here 

because plaintiff’s motion to compel does not allege a complete and total failure to respond to 

discovery, nor does plaintiff’s motion solely concern a request for sanctions. See Local Rule 

251(e).

In this case, the Joint Statement or affidavit in lieu thereof was due to be filed by 

January 22, 2020. A review of the docket reflects that neither has been filed. Therefore, 

plaintiff’s motion is dropped from the court’s calendar, the January 29, 2020, hearing before the 

undersigned is vacated, and the Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate plaintiff’s motion as a 

pending matter on the court’s docket. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: January 27, 2020

____________________________________

DENNIS M. COTA

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:19-cv-00902-WBS-DMC Document 50 Filed 01/27/20 Page 2 of 2