Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-02366/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-02366-16/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1441dj Removal- Declaratory Judgment

---

JOINT MOTION AND PROPOSED ORDER RE 

HUMPHRIES DEPOSITION

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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Al Otro Lado, Inc., et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

Chad F. Wolf,

1 et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: 17-cv-02366-BAS-KSC

ORDER GRANTING JOINT 

MOTIONFOR ENTRY OF 

STIPULATED DEPOSITION 

PROTOCOL FOR THE 

DEPOSITION OF RULE 30(B)(6) 

REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL 

HUMPHRIES

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 1 and 29, and in response to the Court’s comments 

during the March 27, 2020 telephonic joint status conference, the parties have met, 

conferred, and agreed upon the following deposition protocol for the initial remote 

deposition to take place on April 29, 2020 (subject to schedule modifications, if 

necessary, agreed upon by counsel for both parties). The parties submit that, given 

the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, good cause exists for entry of the stipulated 

deposition protocol outlined in this unopposed motion and proposed order. See, e.g., 

Sinceno v. Riverside Church in the City of N.Y., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47859, at *1 

 

1 Acting Secretary Wolf is automatically substituted for former Acting Secretary 

McAleenan pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d).

Case 3:17-cv-02366-BAS-KSC Document 439 Filed 04/13/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 7
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

(S.D.N.Y. Mar. 18, 2020) (approving all depositions being taken by “telephone, 

videoconference, or other remote means” in view of the COVID-19 pandemic); see 

also Pearlstein v. Blackberry Ltd., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47032, at *2-3 (S.D.N.Y. 

Mar. 16, 2020) (same); Thomas v. Wallace, Rush, Schmidt, Inc., 2020 U.S. Dist. 

LEXIS 46925, at *6 (M.D. La. Mar. 18, 2020) (same). Cf. Automatic Equip. Mfg. 

Co. v. Danko Mfg., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47350, at *6 (D. Neb. Mar. 12, 2020) 

(permitting parties to hold Markman hearing by videoconference); ResCap 

Liquidating Tr. v. Primary Residential Mortg., 2020 U.S. U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44607, 

at *3 (D. Minn. Mar. 13, 2020) (COVID-19 “establish[ed] good cause for remote 

testimony.”). If the parties’ initial remote deposition goes smoothly, they anticipate 

asking the Court to enter a similar order governing the remaining depositions to be 

taken in the case.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

I. DEFINITIONS

A. “Attending counsel” shall mean any legal counsel for a party that is 

attending the deposition of a non-party.

B. “Court reporter” shall mean an individual retained by the deposing 

party to transcribe the oral testimony offered at a deposition in the litigation and who 

is authorized to administer oaths either by federal law or by the law of the place of 

examination.

C. “Deposition” shall mean any deposition upon oral examination taken 

pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 27, Fed. R. Civ. P. 30, Fed. R. Civ. P. 45, or any court 

order.

D. “Deposing counsel” shall mean the legal counsel of the party or parties 

noticing and taking a deposition in the litigation.

E. “Defending counsel” shall mean the legal counsel (including counsel 

of record and agency/in-house counsel) of the party, parties, non-party, or nonparties defending a deposition in the litigation.

Case 3:17-cv-02366-BAS-KSC Document 439 Filed 04/13/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 7
3

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

F. “Document” carries its broadest meaning consistent with Fed. R. Civ. 

P. 34 and includes both ESI and Hard Copy Document.

G. “Electronically Stored Information” or “ESI” carries its broadest 

possible meaning consistent with Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(a) and Fed. R. Evid. 1001.

H. “Exhibit” shall mean any Document or Electronically Stored 

Information that is marked as an exhibit during a Deposition.

I. “Hard Copy Document” means any document or thing discoverable 

under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(l) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 34 that cannot be characterized as 

ESI.

J. “Litigation” shall mean the case captioned above.

K. “Parties” shall mean Plaintiffs, Defendants, and their current and 

former employees, executives, officers, and directors.

L. “Non-parties” shall mean all natural or legal persons that are not Parties 

from whom a Party is seeking testimony at a deposition in the litigation.

II. GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND DURATION OF THIS ORDER

A. This Order is intended to allow the parties to continue deposition 

discovery in light of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, with the goal of completing 

discovery by the current June 19, 2020 fact discovery deadline.

B. The Court and counsel recognize that the COVID-19 pandemic requires 

the parties to be flexible in completing deposition discovery in this litigation. The 

parties are encouraged to take steps that will enable deponents, deposing counsel, 

defending counsel, and attending counsel to complete depositions in a manner that 

also takes into account the needs of dependent care and personal health care. In light 

of the developing public health situation, the parties and non-parties shall meet, 

confer, and cooperate with one another regarding the scheduling of depositions and 

the procedures for taking depositions. In doing so, the parties and non-parties shall 

make all reasonable efforts to accommodate reasonable requests for continuances of 

depositions due to illnesses or dependent care needs of attorneys, deponents, or the 

Case 3:17-cv-02366-BAS-KSC Document 439 Filed 04/13/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 7
4

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

court reporter. Such continuances may include taking previously-scheduled 

depositions after the fact discovery deadline, if necessary.

C. Deposing counsel and defending counsel agree to notice depositions 

sufficiently early to allow defending counsel time to prepare the deponent to testify 

remotely and agree to accommodate reasonable scheduling requests. Fourteen days’ 

notice shall typically be considered reasonable notice of the deposition.

D. Unless otherwise stated, this Order is not intended to alter, expand, or 

limit the applicable Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Federal Rules of Evidence, 

and/or court orders.

III. PROCEDURES FOR TAKING THE INITIAL DEPOSITION

A. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 29(a) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(4), the 

30(b)(6) deposition of Michael Humphries shall be taken by remote means that 

comply with local, state and federal guidance, regulations, and orders concerning

social distancing and public health. “Remote means” shall include (a) telephone, (b) 

video-conferencing platforms that allow for the deponent, attending counsel, 

deposing counsel, defending counsel, court reporter, and videographer to participate 

in a deposition without attending the deposition in-person, and (c) any other means 

that the deposing counsel, defending counsel, and attending counsel agree to.

B. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(f)(2), deposing counsel shall be 

responsible for ensuring that any exhibits that they wish to mark and use at the 

deposition can be shown to the witness in a manner that enables the witness to review 

the exhibits during the course of the deposition. Such means of marking and using 

exhibits for the initial deposition shall include (a) sending via Fed Ex, U.S. Postal 

Service, or UPS pre-marked exhibits to the deponent, defending counsel, attending 

counsel, and the court reporter in advance of the deposition; (b) emailing pre-marked 

exhibits to the deponent, defending counsel, attending counsel, and the court reporter 

in advance of the deposition, (c) using a video conferencing platform that enables 

deposing counsel to share exhibits with the deponent, court reporter, defending 

Case 3:17-cv-02366-BAS-KSC Document 439 Filed 04/13/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 4 of 7
5

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

counsel, and attending counsel, and (d) any other means that the deposing counsel, 

defending counsel, and attending counsel agree to. The parties reserve the right to 

request exhibits be emailed sufficiently in advance of the deposition to enable the 

deponent or counsel to print them out for use during the deposition. If the remote 

means utilized does not permit for the court reporter to mark exhibits remotely, 

deposing counsel shall be responsible for pre-marking exhibits.

C. As used in Fed. R. Civ. P. 28(a)(1)(A), the “place of examination” is 

the location of the deponent. A court reporter may administer an oath concerning a 

deposition via remote means.

D. The Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6) deposition of Michael Humphries on 

30(b)(6) Topics 2 and 15 will be limited to 4 hours on the record, unless Plaintiffs 

elect to notice Mr. Humphries as a 30(b)(1) witness.

E. Deposing counsel and defending counsel shall meet, confer, and 

cooperate to ensure that the deponent has technology sufficient to attend a deposition

via remote means. If necessary, this shall include arranging for the deponent to 

participate in a “test run” of the deposition video conferencing software being 

utilized at the expense of the deposing party.

F. Deposing counsel is responsible for ensuring that the remote means 

utilized for a deposition allow for the court reporter to accurately record the 

deponent’s testimony. Either deposing counsel or defending counsel may elect to 

have a technical specialist attend a deposition taken by remote means to ensure that 

technical issues are dealt with in a timely manner.

G. Deposing counsel shall bear the cost of ensuring that the deponent has 

the proper software, hardware and other relevant equipment to attend a deposition 

by video conference.

H. Should technical issues prevent the court reporter from reliably hearing 

or transcribing the testimony at any deposition taken pursuant to this order and such 

technical issue cannot be remedied in a timely manner, deposing counsel, defending 

Case 3:17-cv-02366-BAS-KSC Document 439 Filed 04/13/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 5 of 7
6

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

counsel, and attending counsel shall meet, confer, and cooperate with one another 

regarding the rescheduling of the deposition.

I. In addition to recording deposition testimony by stenographic means, 

the deposing party may record the deposition via video.

J. All objections to the use and admissibility of the transcript or video of 

a deposition taken pursuant to this order based on the fact that the deposition was 

taken by remote means are deemed waived.

K. Deposing counsel and defending counsel shall be responsible for 

ensuring that they have a means of communicating with co-counsel or the deponent, 

as the case may be, during breaks in the deposition; the parties agree not to oppose 

reasonable accommodations to allow such conferences during breaks, as well as 

communications between co-counsel during the deposition. 

L. All persons attending depositions taken by remote means are reminded 

that the typical rules of professionalism and etiquette during depositions still apply. 

All persons attending depositions taken pursuant to this order who do not have an 

immediate need to speak shall ensure that their telephone or video conference lines 

are muted. In addition, all persons attending depositions taken pursuant to this order 

shall ensure that they can do so in a space that is relatively free from distractions that 

would inhibit the course of the deposition.

IV. SCHEDULING OF DEPOSITION

A. The parties shall cooperate in the scheduling of an initial deposition of 

30(b)(6) representative Michael Humphries, which will take place on April 29, 2020

(subject to schedule modifications, if necessary, that are agreed upon by counsel for 

both parties). This deposition shall be a trial run of the parties’ chosen video 

conferencing platform.

B. After the completion of this initial deposition, the parties shall meet, 

confer, and cooperate on the scheduling of other pending depositions and on a 

remote deposition protocol to govern remaining depositions.

Case 3:17-cv-02366-BAS-KSC Document 439 Filed 04/13/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 6 of 7
7

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

V. MODIFICATION

This order may be modified by a Stipulated Order of the Parties or by Order

of the Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated April 13, 2020

____________________ _________ 

Hon. Karen S. Crawford

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:17-cv-02366-BAS-KSC Document 439 Filed 04/13/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 7 of 7