Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-03038/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-03038-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 480
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal

---

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KAMLESH BANGA,

Plaintiff,

v.

EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES 

LLC,

Defendant.

Case No. 14-cv-03038-WHO 

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S 

STATEMENT REGARDING 

DISCOVERY DISPUTE

Re: Dkt. No. 54

On September 23, 2015, plaintiff filed a Statement Regarding Discovery Dispute asking 

the Court to schedule a hearing to resolve a dispute over defendant’s response to one of plaintiff’s 

interrogatories. The interrogatory at issue requests that defendant “identify the names of all the 

entities that had purchased plaintiff’s credit report for promotional purposes during the period of 

January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2014.” Dkt. No. 54 at 6. Defendant responded informally to the

interrogatory by email on September 11, 2015 but has not yet provided a formal response. See id.

at 2, 20-21. Defendant has not responded to plaintiff’s September 23, 2015 statement.

Plaintiff does not identify any problems with the substance of defendant’s informal 

response. See id. at 1-2. My understanding is that her only concern is that defendant has not yet 

provided her with a formal response. I see no reason why defendant should not do so. 

Accordingly, by October 5, 2015, defendant shall provide plaintiff with a formal response to her 

interrogatory. Alternatively, defendant shall file a statement by the same date showing cause why 

it should not be required to provide plaintiff with a formal response.

In the future, plaintiff shall follow the requirements set out in the “Discovery Disputes” 

section of my Standing Order for Civil Cases (available at http://cand.uscourts.gov/whoorders) 

before raising a discovery dispute with the Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 29, 2015

______________________________________

WILLIAM H. ORRICK

United States District Judge

Case 3:14-cv-03038-WHO Document 56 Filed 09/29/15 Page 1 of 1