169 D Mpo Depos-rog3

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

I

2 3

4 5 6

7 8

Document 169

Filed 07/16/2008

Page 1 of 2

Mark A. Wasser CA SB #060160 LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER 400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2640 Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone: (916) 444-6400 Fax: (916) 444-6405 E-mail: [email protected] Bernard C. Barmarm, Sr. CA SB #060508 KERN COUNTY COUNSEL Mark Nations, Chief Deputy CA SB #101838 1115 Truxtun Avenue, Fourth Floor Bakersfield, CA 93301 Phone: (661) 868-3800 Fax: (661) 868-3805 E-mail: [email protected]

9 10 II

Attorneys for Defendants County of Kern, Peter Bryan, Irwin Harris, Eugene Kercher, Jennifer Abraham, Scott Ragland, Toni Smith and William Roy

12 13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15 16

DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O.

17 18 19 20 21

22

Plaintiff, vs. COUNTY OF KERN, et aI.,

Case No.: 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG DEFENDANTS' NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: FURTHER DEPOSITIONS AND INTERROGATORIES BY PLAINTIFF

Defendants. Date: August 6, 2008 Time: 9:30 a.m. (date cleared by CRD) Place: U.S. Bankruptcy Courthouse, Bakersfield Courtroom 8

23 24

Date Action Filed: January 6, 2007 Trial Date: December 2, 2008

25 26 27 28 -1DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: FURTHER DEPOSITIONS AND INTERROGATORIES BY PLAINTIFF

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 169

Filed 07/16/2008

Page 2 of 2

I

TO PLAINTIFF AND HIS ATTORNEY OF RECORD:

2

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, on August 6,2008 at 9:30 a.m. or as soon thereafter as

3

the matter can be heard in the courtroom ofthe above-referenced Court at 1300 18th Street,

4

Bakersfield, California, Defendants will, and hereby do, move the Court for a protective order

5

protecting Defendants from having to respond to further written interrogatories, deposition

6

notices or deposition subpoenas from Plaintiff.

7

The motion will be made on the grounds that, although the Joint Scheduling Order grants

8

Plaintiff "relief' from the 25-interrogatory limit in Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil

9

Procedure and the 10-deposition limit in Rule 30 ofthe Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,

10

Plaintiff has already served 91 interrogatories and has already taken 16 depositions. Plaintiff has

II

served another 7 interrogatories and has noticed another 17 depositions. Nothing about this case

12

warrants so many interrogatories or so many depositions. Plaintiff has rejected Defendants'

13

attempts to negotiate a reasonable limit on the number of interrogatories and depositions and

14

apparently believes he can submit as many interrogatories and take as many depositions as he

15

wants, without limitation.

16 17 18 19

Defendants have met and conferred with Plaintiff without success in an attempt to resolve this issue. Pursuant to Local Rule 37-251, Defendants will prepare, submit to Plaintiff and file a Joint Statement re Discovery Disagreement on or before August 1,2008.

20

Respectfully submitted,

21

Dated: July 16, 2008

LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER

22 23 24

By:_-,/~s/,---M~ar~k~A,,-.3.W!ca~s~s,"er,-

_

Mark A. Wasser Attorney for Defendants, County of Kern, et al.

25 26 27 28 -2DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: FURTHER DEPOSITIONS AND INTERROGATORlES BY PLAINTIFF