Little v. Pacific Seafood Procurement, LLC et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
BRAND LITTLE, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
PACIFIC SEAFOOD PROCUREMENT,
LLC, et al.,
Defendants.
Case No. 23-cv-01098-AGT
DISCOVERY ORDER
Re: Dkt. No. 671
Plaintiffs propose several interim discovery deadlines that would precede the fact-
discovery cutoff and, if met, would keep the case on track. Dkt. 671 at 1. Defendants insist
that the proposed interim deadlines are unworkable. Id. at 3–6.
The Court declines to adopt the proposed interim deadlines at this time but will revisit
the case schedule after Plaintiffs file their “statement discussing their need to take the Rule
30(b)(1) depositions of 75 of Defendants’ principals and employees.” Dkt. 671 at 1 n.1.
Within five days of when Plaintiffs file that statement, the parties shall file a proposed re-
vised case schedule. If their proposal differs from the revised case schedule proposed at the
last case management conference, see dkt. 629 at 14, the parties shall explain why.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 21, 2026
______________________________
Alex G. Tse
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 3:23-cv-01098-AGT Document 683 Filed 04/21/26 Page 1 of 1