Opinion
No. CIV S-03-2682 MCE KJM.
May 17, 2007
ORDER
Plaintiffs have filed objections to the court's minute orders vacating hearings on plaintiffs' discovery motion due to untimely notice. Plaintiffs contend there has been no response to the court's order directing defendants to produce certain documents and thus twenty-one days notice is not required under the local rules. Plaintiffs' motion, however, demonstrates the contrary. The documents in dispute were the subject of a motion to reconsider, which was directed to the district judge. An order on the motion to reconsider was filed March 27, 2007. Plaintiffs' motion confirms that some documents have been produced in response to the order on the motion to reconsider. Plaintiffs' motion is directed to documents that plaintiffs contend have not been produced but asserts should have been under the March 27, 2007 order. The situation presented by plaintiffs' motion is the very kind of dispute the local rule governing discovery is designed to address. There is a dispute about whether all of the documents have been produced, with plaintiffs' conceding some documents have been produced. Local Rule 37-251 therefore requires full meet and confer regarding the disputed documents and the filing of a joint stipulation three days prior to the discovery hearing set with twenty-one days' notice.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs' objections to the court's minute orders are overruled.