Opinion
2:22-cv-00528-JHC
01-06-2023
ENOSA STRICKLAND SR., and KATHLEEN KELIIKOA-STRICKLAND, individually, and as co-Personal Representatives of the ESTATE OF ENOSA STRICKLAND JR., Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF AUBURN, a Municipality; KENNETH LYMAN, individually, Defendants.
ORDER
JOHN H. CHUN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
This matter comes before the Court on Parties' Third LCR Joint Submission Regarding Protective Order Re Proportionality of Plaintiffs' Requests. Dkt. # 25. The Court has reviewed the submission, the related filings, and the balance of the case file. Being fully advised, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendant's motion as follows:
Regarding Requests for Production (RFPs) Nos. 9, 13 & 35, the motion is DENIED.
Regarding RFPs Nos. 15, 16, 17 & 18, the motion is GRANTED.
Regarding the preservation letter, the motion is DENIED. The letter does not govern Defendant's obligation to preserve; the applicable law so governs.