Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-00411/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-00411-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract

---

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 This disposition is not designated for publication and may not be cited. 1

Case No. C 07-411

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO ADJOURN THE HEARING WITH LIMITED DISCOVERY

(JFLC1)

**E-Filed 11/27/2007**

NOT FOR CITATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

JONATHAN C. KALTWASSER,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

CINGULAR WIRELESS LLC, a Delaware

Corporation,

 Defendant.

Case Number C07-00411

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 1

ADJOURN THE HEARING WITH

LIMITED DISCOVERY

[re: docket no. 42]

Defendant has filed an emergency motion for leave to take arbitration-related discovery

and to postpone the hearing on its motion to compel arbitration now scheduled for November 30,

2007. Defendant contends that postponement of the November 30 hearing is necessary to permit

it to respond to issues raised for the first time in Plaintiff’s opposition to the motion to compel

arbitration. 

Courts routinely grant discovery if the discovery sought is germane to the issues

necessary to resolve a motion and deny discovery where the motion may be resolved as a matter

of law based on undisputed facts. See, e.g., Zeno v. Ford Motor Co., 480 F. Supp. 2d 825, 840

Case 3:07-cv-00411-JW Document 48 Filed 11/27/07 Page 1 of 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

2

Case No. C 07-411

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO ADJOURN THE HEARING WITH LIMITED

DISCOVERY_________________________________

(JFLC1)

(W.D. Pa. 2007) (denying summary judgment on issues resolvable as a matter of law based on

the undisputed record and ordering discovery on a limited issue dependent on disputed fact);

Morton v. Hall, 455 F. Supp. 2d 1066, 1079 (C.D. Cal. 2006) (“Because the motion for summary

judgment has been decided on procedural rounds it would be useless to permit discovery.”).

While the Court will not postpone the November 30 hearing in order to allow unrestricted

“arbitration related discovery,” it agrees that Defendant is entitled to limited discovery in order to

respond to Plaintiff’s contention that he neither received nor accepted a modification of the

arbitration agreement in December 2006. The validity and legal effect of that modification bears

directly on question of arbitrability. 

Good cause therefor appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant’s emergency

motion is GRANTED. The hearing on the motion to compel arbitration is hereby continued to

January 25, 2008 at 9am. Any supplemental briefing with respect to the validity and legal effect

of the December 2006 modification to the subject arbitration agreement shall be filed on or

before January 18, 2008.

DATED: November 27, 2007.

 

JEREMY FOGEL

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-00411-JW Document 48 Filed 11/27/07 Page 2 of 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

3

Case No. C 07-411

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO ADJOURN THE HEARING WITH LIMITED

DISCOVERY_________________________________

(JFLC1)

This Order has been served upon the following persons:

Case 3:07-cv-00411-JW Document 48 Filed 11/27/07 Page 3 of 3