Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00736/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00736-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 12:635 Breach of Insurance 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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SIERRA FOOTHILLS PUBLIC )

UTILITY DISTRICT, )

)

Plaintiff, )

v. )

)

CLARENDON AMERICA INSURANCE )

COMPANY, )

)

Defendant. )

)

 )

1:05-CV-00736-REC-LJO

ORDER FOLLOWING INFORMAL

TELEPHONIC CONFERENCE RE:

RESCHEDULING DEFENDANT’S MOTION

TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

AND PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR

PROTECTIVE ORDER (DOCS. 89, 90)

ORDER VACATING DATE FOR HEARING

ON MOTIONS OF JUNE 9, 2006, AND

CONTINUING HEARING ON MOTIONS

(DOCS. 89, 90)

Continued hearing date:

 July 28, 2006

 Time: 9:30 a.m.

Place: Courtroom 7

Plaintiff is proceeding with a civil action in this Court.

The matter has been referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rules 72-302(c)(1) and 72-303.

I. Telephonic Conference

On June 7, 2006, at 2:18 p.m., the Court held an informal

telephonic conference regarding the scheduling of Defendant’s

motion to compel documents responsive to initial disclosures and

documents responsive to request for production of documents, set

numbers one and two (Doc. 89), and Plaintiff’s motion for a

Case 1:05-cv-00736-LJO-LJO Document 112 Filed 06/08/06 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

protective order (Doc. 90), originally set for hearing on June 9,

2006. Participating telephonically on behalf of Plaintiff was

Anthony Osborn; participating telephonically on behalf of

Defendant was Alyson Berg.

The Court noted that it had received midday the courtesy

copies of the joint statement on Defendant’s motion; it had not

received courtesy copies of the joint statement on Plaintiff’s

motion; and because the case was assigned to another Magistrate

Judge, the Court had limited familiarity with the action. The

Court noted that because even the limited materials already

submitted in the form of courtesy copies were voluminous, the

time remaining under the period permitted by local rule for the

Court’s consideration of the materials submitted pursuant to

Local Rule 37-251 was inadequate. Counsel for the parties

volunteered to continue the motions until a time convenient to

the Court, which was subsequently agreed upon as July 28, 2006,

at 9:30 a.m. Counsel’s only concern was a potential need to

adjust dates in the scheduling order; however, counsel agreed to

work with each other with respect to the dates and to inform the

Court should adjustment appear to be necessary. The Court noted

that continuing the hearing on the two discovery motions would

permit the District Judge to determine before consideration of

discovery matters a pending motion for interlocutory review or

entry of final judgment and request for immediate stay (Doc. 92);

further, additional developments might occur in the state Supreme

Court.

Counsel for Plaintiff agreed to submit to the Court no later

than Friday, June 9, 2006, courtesy copies of all documents filed

Case 1:05-cv-00736-LJO-LJO Document 112 Filed 06/08/06 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

by Plaintiff pursuant to Local Rule 37-251 in connection with

Plaintiff’s motion for protective order, including the joint

statement, declaration, and all exhibits (Docs. 101-102). 

II. Continuing the Hearing on the Motion

It IS ORDERED that the hearing on Defendant’s motion to

compel documents responsive to initial disclosures and documents

responsive to request for production of documents, set numbers

one and two (Doc. 89), and Plaintiff’s motion for a protective

order (Doc. 90), originally set for June 9, 2006, IS VACATED, and

the hearing IS RESET for July 28, 2006, at 9:30 a.m., in the

Courtroom of the undersigned Magistrate Judge.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 8, 2006 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00736-LJO-LJO Document 112 Filed 06/08/06 Page 3 of 3