Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01487/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01487-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 29:1801 Farmworker Rights

---

1

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

On June 20, 2016, the Court held the first status conference to learn about the progress of 

discovery thus far. Golden West’s attorney, Ms. Shams, reported that she was in the process of 

reviewing seven banker’s boxes of documents received from her client that were potentially responsive 

to the plaintiffs’ discovery request. (Doc. 29 at 2; Doc. 30) She anticipated completing the review 

within a week or two. Likewise, she was working with her clients on the production of responsive 

electronic data. Counsel reported that they had not yet conferred about the format or content of the 

output of electronic data as required by the scheduling order (Doc. 27 at 4). Likewise, they had not yet 

finalized the protective order they wish to have issued. Thus, the Court sets the following deadlines and 

ORDERS:

1. No later than June 24, 2016, Golden West SHALL produce the draft protective order 

to plaintiffs with proposed changes, if any;

2. No later than July 1, 2016, the parties SHALL file the stipulated protective order. In 

the event there remains disagreement over any terms of the protective order, the parties SHALL file the 

SANDRA GARYBO, et al.,

 Plaintiffs,

v.

LEONARDO BROS., et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:15-cv-01487 DAD JLT

ORDER AFTER FIRST STATUS CONFERENCE

Case 1:15-cv-01487-DAD-JLT Document 31 Filed 06/20/16 Page 1 of 2
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

proposed protective order which sets forth the terms on which they agree. They SHALL also set forth 

their positions on the terms about which they disagree. The Court will then consider the parties’ 

positions and issue the protective order that, in its judgment, it determines is appropriate;

3. No later than July 1, 2016, the relevant personnel from each side, including counsel if 

they wish, SHALL confer to determine the content of the electronic production and the format of the 

electronic production;

4. No later than July 8, 2016, Golden West SHALL make available to plaintiffs’ copy 

service, the paper documents responsive to the plaintiffs’ discovery request;

5. No later than July 22, 2016, Golden West SHALL produce the electronic data 

responsive to the plaintiffs’ discovery request;

6. In the event that either side does not meet a deadline set forth here, that party SHALL

show cause in writing within five days of the missed deadline why they/it failed to comply with the 

Court’s orders.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 20, 2016 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01487-DAD-JLT Document 31 Filed 06/20/16 Page 2 of 2