Opinion
No. C-07-03365 EDL.
March 6, 2008
ORDER GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL
On January 22, 2008, Plaintiffs, who are pro se, filed a motion to compel production of documents and for discovery to begin. Defendants opposed the motion on the ground that it was premature because the parties had not met and conferred as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f), and had not served initial disclosures, although they were supposed to be served by December 31, 2007. On March 4, 2008, the Court held a hearing on Plaintiffs' motion.
At the hearing, Defendants' counsel represented that Defendants had recently sent their initial disclosures to Plaintiffs. Therefore, there is no impediment to the commencement of discovery.
With respect to Plaintiffs' discovery requests for police personnel and related records, Plaintiffs stated at the hearing that they are particularly interested in receiving: (1) information showing that the officers' certifications to act as law enforcement officers are up to date; and (2) complaints or reports of complaints, whether determined to be unfounded or not, relating to harassment, racial profiling or other similar conduct within the last five years with respect to the officers at issue. As discussed at the hearing, Defendants' counsel shall review the relevant personnel and/or complaint/internal affairs files for responsive material, including but not limited to certifications and complaints sought by Plaintiffs, and shall provide a written response to Plaintiffs' discovery no later than March 11, 2008. No later than March 25, 2008, Defendants shall produce discoverable material and provide Plaintiffs with a privilege log describing the documents that have been withheld. The parties shall then meet and confer regarding the withheld documents and if a dispute remains regarding production of those documents, the parties shall file a joint letter concisely setting forth their positions on whether the withheld documents should be released and shall lodge a limited number of disputed documents for the Court's in camera review.
IT IS SO ORDERED.