Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-00320/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-00320-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

ERIKA GREGORY, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

CITY OF VALLEJO, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:13-cv-0320-KJM-KJN

ORDER

On May 14, 2014, the court conducted an informal telephonic discovery conference upon 

the request of the parties, at which attorney Nicholas Casper appeared on behalf of plaintiffs, and 

attorney Furah Faruqui appeared on behalf of defendants. Following discussions with the parties 

at the conference, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Within 30 days of this order,1the City of Vallejo shall produce any portion of officer 

Chase Calhoun’s personnel file that relates to the investigation of, and reasons for, his 

 

1

The court notes that the fact discovery completion deadline set by the district judge is May 19, 

2014. (ECF No. 15.) Although the present dispute was resolved before that deadline, defendants’ 

counsel indicated that she needed some additional time to produce the responsive documents due 

to logistical reasons. Accordingly, the court extends the discovery completion deadline for the 

limited purpose of producing the documents covered by this order. This order does not otherwise 

modify the general fact discovery completion deadline as defined in the scheduling order. If the 

parties require an extension of that deadline, they must seek relief from the district judge by virtue 

of a stipulated proposed order or a properly-noticed motion. 

Case 2:13-cv-00320-KJM-KJN Document 23 Filed 05/15/14 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

termination. In ordering the production of these documents, the court expresses no 

opinion concerning their ultimate admissibility, but merely finds, for purposes of 

discovery, that such documents appear reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 

of admissible evidence. 

2. Any responsive documents shall be produced in accordance with the terms and 

conditions outlined in the stipulated protective order previously entered by the court 

on November 22, 2013. (See ECF No. 17.)

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: May 14, 2014

 

 

Case 2:13-cv-00320-KJM-KJN Document 23 Filed 05/15/14 Page 2 of 2