Pizana

Pizana v. Sanmedica International LLC

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 15, 20201:18-cv-00644California7,869 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 RAUL PIZANA, individually and on No. 1:18-cv-00644-DAD-SKO behalf of all others similarly situated, 7 Plaintiff, 8 ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO v. COMPEL AND DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS 9 FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER

SANMEDICA INTERNATIONAL, LLC,

10 and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, (Docs. 82, 83, & 84) 11 Defendants. 12 13 14 This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Raul Pizana (“Plaintiff”)’s motion to compel 15 discovery responses (Doc. 82) and Defendant SanMedica International, LLC (“Defendant”)’s 16 motions for protective order (Docs. 83 & 84). Plaintiff and Defendant filed their joint statements 17 directed to the motions, as required by this Court’s Local Rule 251, on September 16, 2020. 18 (Docs. 89, 90, & 91.) The Court reviewed the parties’ papers and all supporting material and 19 found the matter suitable for decision without oral argument. The hearing set for September 23, 20 2020, was therefore vacated. (Doc. 94.) 21 Having…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.