Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-04145/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-04145-28/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 Some of these document requests are actually interrogatories since they ask Defendant to

provide a description and not just to produce documents. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DONNA HINES,

Plaintiff,

v.

CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES

COMMISSION, et al.,

Defendants.

___________________________________/

No. C-07-4145 CW (EMC)

ORDER RE DISCOVERY DISPUTE RE

NEW INTERROGATORIES AND

DOCUMENT REQUESTS

(Docket Nos. 344, 345)

Previously, this Court set a fact discovery deadline of April 30, 2010. See Docket No. 321

(order, filed on 4/2/2010). On that date, Plaintiff propounded 18 new interrogatories and 7 new

document requests.1

 The Court deems this new discovery untimely. Under Civil Local Rule 26-2,

“[d]iscovery requests that call for responses or depositions after the applicable discovery cut-off are

not enforceable, except by order of the Court for good cause shown.” Civ. L.R. 26-2. Plaintiff has

made no showing of good cause. Plaintiff could easily have asked for the requested discovery well

in advance of April 30. Moreover, the discovery sought by Plaintiff does not appear to be critical to

her case. Indeed, the Court has already ordered Defendant to produce the critical discovery -- i.e.,

the information related to the successful candidates for the positions for which Plaintiff applied.

///

///

///

Case 4:07-cv-04145-CW Document 347 Filed 05/20/10 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s request that the Court compel Defendant to respond to the discovery

is hereby DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 20, 2010

_________________________ EDWARD M. CHEN

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:07-cv-04145-CW Document 347 Filed 05/20/10 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

DONNA HINES,

Plaintiff,

v.

CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES

COMMISSION, et al.,

Defendants.

___________________________________/

No. C-07-4145 CW (EMC)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the U.S. District Court, Northern

District of California. On the below date, I served a true and correct copy of the attached, by placing

said copy/copies in a postage-paid envelope addressed to the person(s) listed below, by depositing

said envelope in the U.S. Mail; or by placing said copy/copies into an inter-office delivery

receptacle located in the Office of the Clerk.

Donna Hines 

268 Bush Street, #3204 

San Francisco, CA 94104 

415-205-3377 

Dated: May 20, 2010 RICHARD W. WIEKING, CLERK

By: /s/ Leni Doyle 

Leni Doyle

Deputy Clerk

Case 4:07-cv-04145-CW Document 347 Filed 05/20/10 Page 3 of 3