CA Sportfishing Protection Alliance v. Allison ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 CALIFORNIA SPORTFISHING No. 2:20-cv-02482-WBS-AC PROTECTION ALLIANCE, 11 Plaintiff, 12 ORDER v. 13 KATHLEEN ALLISON, in her official 14 capacity as the Secretary of the California Department of Corrections and 15 Rehabilitation, 16 Defendant. 17 18 COUNTY OF AMADOR, a public agency of the State of California, 19 Plaintiff, 20 v. 21 KATHLEEN ALLISON, in her official 22 capacity as the Secretary of the California Department of Corrections; PATRICK 23 COVELLO, in his official capacity as the Warden of the California Department of 24 Corrections and Rehabilitation Mule Creek State Prison, 25 Defendants. 26 27 28 ] Pending before the court is plaintiffs’ motion to compel Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of 2 || CDCR. This discovery matter was referred to the undersigned pursuant to E.D. Cal. R. (“Local 3 || Rule”) 302(c)(1). The motion was set for hearing on the papers on September 28, 2022, before 4 | the undersigned. ECF Nos. 63, 64. This discovery matter was referred to the undersigned 5 || pursuant to E.D. Cal. R. (“Local Rule”) 302(c)(1). 6 Local Rule 251(b) establishes requirements for any party bringing a motion pursuant to 7 || Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26 through 37, including the requirement that the parties meet 8 | and confer and file a joint discovery statement. Here, no joint discovery statement was filed 9 || despite the statement in the notice of motion that a joint statement was forthcoming. ECF No. 63 10 || at 3. Additionally, there is no indication that the parties have met and conferred regarding the 11 || instant dispute. Because plaintiffs, the moving parties, did not satisfy Local Rule 251(b)’s meet 12 || and confer requirement and the joint discovery statement requirement, the motion to compel will 13 || be denied without prejudice. See e.g., U.S. v. Molen, 2012 WL 5940383, at *1 (E.D.Cal. Nov. 14 || 27, 2012) (where a party fails to comply with Local Rule 251, discovery motions are denied 15 || without prejudice to re-filing). 16 For the reasons state above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs’ motion to 17 || compel, ECF No. 63, is DENIED without prejudice. 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 | DATE: October 5, 2022 Ctlhter— Lane 20 ALLISON CLAIRE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28