From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kabir v. Mocek

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Nov 22, 2022
2:22-cv-1855 TLN DB (E.D. Cal. Nov. 22, 2022)

Opinion

2:22-cv-1855 TLN DB

11-22-2022

GHESAL KABIR, FARYAL KABIR, Plaintiffs, v. CRYSTEL MOCEK, Defendant.


ORDER

DEBOFAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

On November 14, 2022, plaintiffs' counsel filed a “statement re discovery disagreement pursuant to Local Rule 251.” (ECF No. 20.) Pursuant to Local Rule 251, motions related to discovery shall consist of a brief notice of motion and motion “scheduling the hearing date[.]” Local Rule 251(a). “No other documents need be filed at this time.” (Id.) If after complying with the meet and confer requirements a dispute remains the parties shall file a Joint Statement re Discovery Disagreement that contains “[a]ll arguments and briefing that would otherwise be included in a memorandum of points and authorities supporting or opposing the motion[.]” Local Rule 251(a)-(c).

Generally, discovery disputes are referred to the assigned magistrate judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(1).

Here, the document filed by plaintiffs is not a notice of motion. Nor is it a Joint Statement. Instead, it is a statement from plaintiffs vaguely addressing a discovery dispute, vaguely asserting compliance with the applicable meet and confer requirements, and requesting “that the Court please schedule [a] teleconference at its earliest possible opportunity.” (ECF No. 20 at 6.) Such a filing is not permitted by Local Rule 251.

This is not the first time plaintiffs' counsel has failed to comply with the Local Rules. See ECF No 16. Such failures cause undue burden and delay.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs' November 14, 2022 Statement re Discovery Dispute (ECF No. 20) is denied without prejudice to renewal.

In the event the parties notice a discovery dispute before the undersigned, the parties shall review and comply with the undersigned's Standard Information re discovery disputes found on to the court's web page at http://www.caed.uscourts.gov/caednew/index.cfm/judges/all-judges/united-states-magistrate-judge-deborah-barnes-db. Note that the undersigned enforces a twenty-five-page limit on Joint Statements, and that title pages, tables of contents, tables of citations, etc., all count toward the twenty-five-page limit.


Summaries of

Kabir v. Mocek

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Nov 22, 2022
2:22-cv-1855 TLN DB (E.D. Cal. Nov. 22, 2022)
Case details for

Kabir v. Mocek

Case Details

Full title:GHESAL KABIR, FARYAL KABIR, Plaintiffs, v. CRYSTEL MOCEK, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Nov 22, 2022

Citations

2:22-cv-1855 TLN DB (E.D. Cal. Nov. 22, 2022)