Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_18-cv-01661/USCOURTS-caed-1_18-cv-01661-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 370
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28:1446 Petition for Removal

---

1

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

At the request of the plaintiff, the Court held an informal telephonic conference to address 

ongoing discovery disputes. By the time of the conference, the parties had resolved most of the 

issues already, but several remained. 

In discussing the issues, the Court noted that there was nothing in the scheduling order that 

prevented the plaintiff from obtaining “class1” discovery. Rather, the order contemplated no extra 

time for phased discovery. Moreover, the defense has not made a proper showing that class 

discovery is prohibitively burdensome. On the other hand, the Court sees no reason—and 

plaintiff’s counsel agreed—for the need for discovery as to the personal identifiers of those who 

may be prospective members of the collection.

In addition, some of the requests are vague and ambiguous and seem to fail to seek the 

 

1 Notably, this is not a class action but, instead, a collective action case. However, because this is the phraseology 

employed by counsel, the Court will use this term here.

TERINA CLARK, et al.,

 Plaintiffs,

v.

WORLDMARK, THE CLUB, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: 1:18-cv-01661 NONE JLT

ORDER AFTER INFORMAL CONFERENCE 

RE: DISCOVERY DISPUTE

Case 1:18-cv-01661-DAD-JLT Document 39 Filed 02/07/20 Page 1 of 2
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

27

28

specific information needed by the plaintiffs. 

After discussion with counsel, they agreed they would further meet and confer and, no later 

than February 14, 2020, defense counsel would notify plaintiff’s counsel as to the information that 

would be provided. Because this discovery has remained outstanding for far too long, if the 

discovery is not provided by February 28, 2020 (or earlier date agreed upon by counsel), plaintiff 

may file a motion to compel. Any such motion SHALL comply with Local Rule 251(c), which 

requires first, the filing of a notice of motion and then the filing of a joint statement no later than 

seven days before the hearing.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 7, 2020 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:18-cv-01661-DAD-JLT Document 39 Filed 02/07/20 Page 2 of 2