Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-03808/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-03808-28/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

---

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

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KAREN MOE HUMPHREYS,

Plaintiff,

 v.

 REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF

CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C-04-03808 SI (EDL)

ORDER FOLLOWING JUNE 13, 2006

DISCOVERY CONFERENCE

On June 13, 2006, the Court held a discovery conference in this case. For the reasons stated

at the hearing, the Court issues the following order.

1. Defendants were not prepared at the discovery conference to argue and allow the Court to

resolve legal issues such as waiver of the attorney-client privilege. Therefore, these issues

will be resolved by formal motion. Plaintiff may file a motion on the regular 35-day

schedule to be heard no earlier than August 8, 2006. 

2. No later than June 19, 2006, Defendants shall provide to Plaintiff and file with the Court a

privilege log that complies with this Court’s standing discovery order. In addition,

Defendants shall review their document production to date for redacted documents and shall

include those on the privilege log. The parties shall meet and confer before bringing any

disputes regarding the privilege log to the Court. If necessary, the Court will engage in

limited in camera review of a small number of documents if Plaintiff challenges Defendants’

assertion of privilege. In particular, the Court will conduct an in camera review of document

number 12 on the privilege log dated December 13, 2002. Defendants shall produce that

Case 3:04-cv-03808-SI Document 390 Filed 06/15/06 Page 1 of 3
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

document for in camera review no later than June 19, 2006. 

3. On or before June 20, 2006, Defendants shall make available to Plaintiff for inspection and

copying all Sawyers investigation documents to Plaintiff. Production is subject to the

existing protective order, which does not expire for purposes of this discovery only until

further Order of this Court. No later than June 20, 2006, Defendants shall also produce the

Sawyers privilege log to Plaintiff. 

4. Plaintiff served written discovery seeking information about alleged “sweetheart deals” made

by Defendants under which certain UC employees were given lucrative contracts but did not

have to work. No later than June 14, 2006, Defendants shall provide any and all documents

pertaining to the nature and scope etc., of any work that Mr. Stephens has done for

Defendant U.C. Regents since leaving his full-time employment. Defendants state that they

have otherwise fully responded to this discovery. After production of the Stephens

document, Plaintiff may propound a request for admission on Defendants seeking an

admission that other than the settlement agreements already produced and documents, if any,

produced on this topic, there is no other documentation pertaining to work done under socalled “sweetheart deals.” 

5. The Court will address any sanctions issue through regularly noticed motion. 

6. Plaintiff seeks all documents from the following University server paths: s/complaint

resolution/cases/ICA; s/complaint resolution/ICA and s:\Complaint

Resolution\Cases\Athletics\ICA action plan drt 4-14.doc. Plaintiff’s entitlement to these

documents depends at least in part on resolution of the waiver issue, which will be decided

after further briefing. However, as written, the request for these documents is overbroad. In

the meantime, Defendants shall preserve the contents of those server paths. Plaintiff shall

provide an explanation to Defendants as to where they obtained these particular server paths. 

Defense counsel shall find out how those server paths can be searched, for example, whether

there is an index for the server paths or whether those paths can be searched using search

terms, and inform Plaintiff. 

7. Defendants shall search Michael Smith’s and Jeffrey Blair’s files for any Gender Equity

Case 3:04-cv-03808-SI Document 390 Filed 06/15/06 Page 2 of 3
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

3

Committee notes, Executive Team meeting notes predating January 8, 2003, and Executive

Team notes between April 16 and June 6, 2004. 

8. The parties shall meet and confer in an effort to stipulate to the authenticity of documents

that Plaintiff wishes to offer at trial. If Defendants will not stipulate to the authenticity of the

documents, Plaintiff has the right to obtain the original documents. The parties shall meet

and confer in an attempt to identify handwriting on relevant trial documents. 

9. Future meet and confer sessions shall be transcribed either by a court reporter or through

audio tape. If the Court is not is session, the parties may hold meet and confer sessions in the

courtroom using the Court’s audio recording equipment and the Court will have an extern

attend the meet and confer session if available. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 15, 2006 

ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:04-cv-03808-SI Document 390 Filed 06/15/06 Page 3 of 3