The 21-day period set out by Judge Krieger in her Order above has lapsed, and

no proposed agreement on how the parties might take an appeal from a construction

determination was offered to Judge Krieger. It is clear that Judge Krieger was aware of

the Rule 16 Scheduling Order dated April 15, 2010, entered by Magistrate Judge

Watanabe when she entered her Order above and lifted the stay in this case.

Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a protective

order may be issued only for good cause “to protect a party or person from annoyance,

embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense . . . .” Here, Judge Krieger

entered her Order as stated above and reopened general discovery after consideration

of Defendants’ undue burden argument. See docket nos. 306, 307 at pp. 20-22. The

crux of Defendants’ argument in the subject motion (docket no. 309) was previously

presented to Judge Krieger on July 30, 2010, and was rejected based upon Judge

Krieger’s Order above. Accordingly, the Defendants have failed to meet their burden to

show good cause for re-imposing the stay of discovery.