Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-02819/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-02819-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrimination

---

United States District Court

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

TAMIKO OLABINTAN,

Plaintiff,

v.

SHURGARD STORAGE CENTERS,

INCORPORATED, et al.,

Defendants.

___________________________________/

No. C-04-2819 CRB (EMC)

ORDER REQUIRING JOINT LETTER

RE: DISCOVERY DISPUTES

(Docket Nos. 50, 51)

The parties have filed separate letter briefs raising disputes over Plaintiff's further deposition

and Defendant's responses and objections to Plaintiff's discovery requests. (Docket Nos 50, 51.) 

The Court hereby orders that the parties shall further meet and confer and shall file, by 4 p.m., May

25, 2006, a joint statement outlining any outstanding issues regarding discovery. For each

remaining dispute, the parties should provide brief statements in support of their respective

positions, including citation to any applicable legal authority. No further briefing on these disputes

will be accepted.

The parties shall use the attached template for their joint letter. Plaintiff shall electronically

file the joint letter, and shall fax a courtesy copy of the joint letter to chambers at (415) 522-4200 by 

//

//

//

//

Case 3:04-cv-02819-CRB Document 52 Filed 05/22/06 Page 1 of 4
United States District Court

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

the specified time. Upon submission of the joint letter, the Court will determine the necessity of

setting a telephonic hearing on the matter.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 22, 2006

_________________________ EDWARD M. CHEN

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:04-cv-02819-CRB Document 52 Filed 05/22/06 Page 2 of 4
United States District Court

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

 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.

3

[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 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]

1. [Position of Party Seeking Discovery]3

2. [Position of Party Opposing Discovery]

Case 3:04-cv-02819-CRB Document 52 Filed 05/22/06 Page 3 of 4
United States District Court

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

4

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-02819-CRB Document 52 Filed 05/22/06 Page 4 of 4