Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-01494/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-01494-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 42:9607 Real Property Tort to Land

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HUHTAMAKI FOODSERVICE, INC.,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1494 LKK JFM

vs.

AMERIPRIDE SERVICES, INC.,

Defendant. ORDER

 /

On September 30, 2005, defendant filed a motion to compel production of

documents and responses to interrogatories. (Docket No. 48.) This motion was accompanied by

a request for an order shortening time for hearing on a motion to compel discovery. (Docket No.

49.) In its affidavit, defendant stated he spoke with counsel for plaintiff by telephone on

September 30, 2005 and informed him that defendant would file an application for hearing on

shortened time, and stated counsel for plaintiff voiced no objection to the filings and indicated he

likely would file a motion as well.

On October 3, 2005, plaintiff filed a motion to compel production of documents

and responses to interrogatories. (Docket No. 52.) Plaintiff did not file a separate request for

order shortening time, but stated in its motion that plaintiff requests its motion be heard

contemporaneously with defendant’s motion to compel to maintain judicial economy. 

Case 2:04-cv-01494-LKK-JFM Document 69 Filed 10/11/05 Page 1 of 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

2

On October 3, 2005, defendant filed an amended motion to compel (Docket No.

60) and an amended affidavit in support of its request for order shortening time (Docket No. 66). 

The parties have not complied with Local Rule 6-144(e), and the record reflects

they have complied with that rule in the past (see September 16, 2005 joint application for order

shortening time submitted to the district court). However, both counsel state they are in the

process of meeting and conferring in an effort to resolve their discovery disputes and agree their

motions are prematurely brought solely for the purpose of reserving space on this court’s October

20, 2005 calendar. Because it appears both parties agree these motions may be heard on October

20, 2005, defendant’s request for order shortening time will be granted, and the motions will be

calendared for hearing on October 20, 2005, before the undersigned. Counsel are reminded of

their obligation to file a joint stipulation re discovery disagreements at least three days prior to

that hearing date. Local Rule 37-251(c). 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendant’s September 30, 2005 and October 3, 2005 applications for an order

shortening time are granted (Docket Nos.50 and 66);

2. Defendant’s October 3, 2005 amended motion to compel shall be heard on

October 20, 2005, at 11:00 a.m. in courtroom No. 26 before the undersigned (Docket No. 60);

and

3. Plaintiff’s October 3, 2005 motion to compel shall be heard on October 20,

2005, at 11:00 a.m. in courtroom No. 26 before the undersigned (Docket No. 52). 

DATED: October 11, 2005.

001

huhtamaki.ost

Case 2:04-cv-01494-LKK-JFM Document 69 Filed 10/11/05 Page 2 of 2