Puckett

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 JEREMY PHILLIP PUCKETT, No. 2:22-cv-0350 KJM DB 13 Plaintiff, 14 v. ORDER 15 COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 18 Pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(1) this matter came before the undersigned on February 23, 19 2024, for hearing of plaintiff’s motion to compel. (ECF No. 67.) Attorneys Hilary Soloff and 20 Ryan Snyder appeared on behalf of plaintiff, who was also present. Attorney John Whitefleet 21 appeared on behalf of defendants. After hearing oral argument, plaintiff’s motion was taken 22 under submission. 23 The discovery process in theory should be cooperative and largely unsupervised by the 24 district court.” Sali v. Corona Regional Medical Center, 884 F.3d 1218, 1219 (9th Cir. 2018). 25 “When that cooperation breaks down, the district court has broad discretion to regulate discovery 26 conduct and, if needed, impose a wide array of sanctions.” Infanzon v. Allstate Insurance 27 Company, 335 F.R.D. 305, 311 (C.D. Cal. 2020). When the…