Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-05262/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-05262-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:501 Copyright Infringement

---

U

nite

d

State

s

District C

o

u

rt

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

CHRISTOPHER R. HARRIS,

Plaintiff,

v.

SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS, INC.,

Defendant.

___________________________________/

No. C-04-5262 CRB (EMC)

ORDER RE MEET AND CONFER

Both parties have filed discovery motions which are set for hearing before this Court on June

8, 2005. (Plaintiff has filed two motions, and Defendant one motion.) Based on the Court’s review

of the papers filed by the parties, it appears that the vast majority of the meet and confers have taken

place by letter or telephone. This is in violation of the Court’s standing order on discovery

procedures, which requires in-person meet and confers, except where good cause is shown why a

telephone meet and confer is adequate. In addition, the Court questions the adequacy of the meet

and confers that have taken place. From the papers, it seems that the parties have not made a good

faith attempt to reach an agreement on their discovery disputes.

Accordingly, the Court hereby orders the parties to conduct an in-person meet and confer by

May 11, 2005. Either lead trial counsel shall attend the meet and confer or counsel with full and

complete authority on discovery matters. In lieu of any opposition or reply briefs for the motions, the

parties shall file a joint letter with the Court by May 18, 2005. In the joint letter, the parties should

describe who participated in the meet and confer and for how long. In addition, the parties should

identify which issues on which they were able to reach agreement after meeting and conferring. If

Case 3:04-cv-05262-CRB Document 41 Filed 04/20/05 Page 1 of 4
U

nite

d

State

s

District C

o

u

rt

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

there are any remaining disputes, then, for each dispute, the parties should provide brief statements

of their respective positions and cite any applicable legal authority. The parties should use the

attached template for their joint letter.

The parties are forewarned that the in-person meet-and-confer requirement shall be imposed

on all future discovery disputes. The parties are also forewarned that the Court will not look kindly

upon unnecessary posturing and that any party that takes a position that is not substantially justified

may be subject to sanctions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 20, 2005

 /s/ 

 EDWARD M. CHEN

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:04-cv-05262-CRB Document 41 Filed 04/20/05 Page 2 of 4
U

nite

d

State

s

District C

o

u

rt

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

 Note for Counsel: The Court may request a courtesy copy of the joint letter to be faxed to

chambers. If so, counsel should still file a copy of the joint letter with the Clerk of the Court. The letter

faxed to chambers is a courtesy copy only. As a general matter, parties may not fax any papers to the

Court without prior leave of the Court.

2

 Note for Counsel: Unnecessary exhibits should not be attached.

3

EXHIBIT 1 -- SAMPLE JOINT LETTER

[Date]

VIA [METHOD]1

Honorable Edward M. Chen

United States Magistrate Judge

U.S. District Court

450 Golden Gate Avenue

San Francisco, CA 94102

Re: [Case number and case name]

Dear Judge Chen:

The parties have met and conferred regarding several discovery disputes. The meet and

confer took place on [date], with the participation of [Plaintiff’s attorney], representing Plaintiff, and

[Defendant’s attorney], representing Defendant. The meet and confer was [in person or over the

telephone] and lasted approximately [minutes or hours].

I. RESOLVED DISCOVERY DISPUTES

The parties reached agreement on several discovery disputes. Those agreements are as

follows:

[Description of Agreement No. 1.]

[Description of Agreement No. 2.]

[Description of Agreement No. 3, etc.]

II. REMAINING DISCOVERY DISPUTES

The parties were not able to reach agreement on the remaining discovery disputes. Those

remaining disputes and the parties’ respective positions are provided below. Copies of the relevant

discovery requests and responses are attached as Exhibits [numbers].2

A. [Dispute No. 1]

Case 3:04-cv-05262-CRB Document 41 Filed 04/20/05 Page 3 of 4
U

nite

d

State

s

District C

o

u

rt

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

3

 Note for Counsel: Each party’s position should be stated succinctly (e.g., in one paragraph).

The purpose of the joint letter is to inform the Court of the essence of the dispute in lieu of full briefing.

The Court may order full briefing and/or a hearing if necessary.

4

1. [Position of Party Seeking Discovery]3

2. [Position of Party Opposing Discovery]

B. [Dispute No. 2]

1. [Position of Party Seeking Discovery]

2. [Position of Party Opposing Discovery]

C. [Dispute No. 3]

1. [Position of Party Seeking Discovery]

2. [Position of Party Opposing Discovery]

D. [Dispute No. 4, etc.]

1. [Position of Party Seeking Discovery]

2. [Position of Party Opposing Discovery]

Sincerely,

[Plaintiff’s counsel] [Defendant’s counsel]

Attorney for Plaintiff Attorney for Defendant

Case 3:04-cv-05262-CRB Document 41 Filed 04/20/05 Page 4 of 4