Bindinglaw

US · rules

C.D. Cal. L.R. 37-2.4

Failure to File Joint Stipulation

activein force · 2026-06-01 – presentact-effective-date

The Court will not

consider any discovery motion in the absence of a joint stipulation or

a declaration from counsel for the moving party establishing that

opposing counsel (a) failed to confer in a timely manner under L.R.

37-1; (b) failed to provide the opposing party’s portion of the joint

stipulation in a timely manner under L.R. 37-2.2; or (c) refused to sign

and return the joint stipulation after the opposing party’s portion was

added. If such declaration accompanies the motion, then L.Rs. 6-1, 7-

9 and 7-10 apply.

Provenance

Source
www.cacd.uscourts.gov
Retrieved
2026-09-18
Edition
fed-district-2026-09-18
Content hash
1920d6bd4263cbba708553c54869b00b4dbd9f50ccc519e72d6494c6c78bc5db
View the official source →

The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.

Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.

Coverage · API docs

Bindinglaw

Point-in-time US law with the receipt attached. Source URL, retrieval time, content hash, and validity dates on every answer.

curl api.binding.law/v1/law/coverage

© 2026 binding.law · a Jubal, Inc. productAttorneys and firms never pay. Ever.