Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00721/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00721-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Flame Engineering, Inc.
Defendant
James Jefferson
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

JAMES JEFFERSON, NO. CIV.S-06-0721 DFL DAD

Plaintiff,

v. ORDER

FLAME ENGINEERING, INC.,

Defendant.

____________________________/

This matter came before the court on July 21, 2006, for

hearing on plaintiff’s motion to quash subpoenas or, in the

alternative, for protective order. Attorney James Rushford appeared

on behalf of plaintiff. Attorney Randall Romero appeared on behalf

of defendant.

Having considered all written materials submitted in

connection with the motion, and after hearing oral argument, for the

reasons set forth on the record during the hearing, the court finds 

/////

/////

Case 2:06-cv-00721-DFL-DAD Document 28 Filed 07/26/06 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

that the motion is rendered moot by the agreement reached between

counsel at the hearing regarding the production of redacted records

to defense counsel. 

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion

to quash defendant’s subpoenas or, in the alternative, for protective

order is denied as moot.

DATED: July 25, 2006.

DAD:im

Ddad1\orders.civil\jefferson0721.mtn_to_quash.wpd

Case 2:06-cv-00721-DFL-DAD Document 28 Filed 07/26/06 Page 2 of 2