RLC Industries Co. v. Liberty Ins. Co.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RLC INDUSTRIES CO. and ROSEBURG No. 2:23-cv-0649 TLN DB

FOREST PRODCUTS CO.,

12 13 Plaintiffs, ORDER 14 v. 15 LIBERTY INSURANCE

CORPORATION,

16 17 Defendant. 18 19 As explained by the parties, this “insurance case concerns whether fees incurred by 20 [plaintiff] in defending against” lawsuits related to the Mill Fire were reasonable and necessary. 21 (JS (ECF No. 46-1) at 2.) On April 22, 2024, plaintiff filed a motion to compel supplemental 22 responses along with the parties’ Joint Statement. (ECF No. 46.) The motion is noticed for 23 hearing before the undersigned on May 8, 2024, pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(1). (ECF No. 52.) 24 Review of the Joint Statement finds that at issue are defendant’s responses to two interrogatories: 25 Interrogatory No. 6 and Interrogatory No. 10. With respect to Interrogatory No. 10, defendant 26 asserts that plaintiff’s arguments found in the Joint Statement “were not . . . the subject of . . . 27 telephonic meet and confer conferences.” (JS (ECF…