JGX, Inc. v. Handlery

— 1 — — 2 — — 3 — 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA — 6 — 7 JGX, INC., et al., Case No. 17-cv-00287-BLF (SVK) 8 Plaintiffs, ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY 9 v. DISPUTE 10 JOHN HANDLERY, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 88 11 Defendants. 12 On October 22, 2019, the Court held a hearing on the Parties’ discovery dispute set forth at 13 Dkt. 88. Upon consideration of the Parties’ submission and arguments of counsel and for the 14 reasons set forth at the hearing, the Court ORDERS as follows: 15 1. The participation of former-Defendant Singer in communications between the Handlery 16 Defendants and their counsel does not, by itself, preclude the attorney-client privilege or 17 the work-product doctrine. As alleged extensively in the Complaint, Singer was acting as 18 Defendants’ agent during the relevant time period prior to the filing of this suit. See 19 Schaeffer v. Gregory Village Partners, 78 F. Supp. 3d 1198, 1204 (N.D. Cal. 2015). 20 2. Plaintiffs’ challenge to the Handlery Defendants’ privilege log is untimely. The log was 21 served on Plaintiffs in December of 2018 and the challenge to the log was not raised until 22 after the close of discovery in October of 2019. 23 3. Plaintiffs’ challenge to the Singer privilege log as set forth in Dkt. 88 is not per se 24 untimely. 25 4. As directed at the hearing, Defendants submitted documents that were unique to the Singer 26 privilege log (in that they did not appear on the Handlery log) to the Court for an in-camera 27 review. Dkt. 93. The Court has reviewed these documents and finds that they are covered 1 documents which the Court preliminarily finds are NOT protected by either privilege: 2 e SINGERPRIVO0000001-2; 3 e SINGERPRIV0000003; 4 e SINGERPRIV0000020-23; 5 e SINGERPRIV0000024; 6 e SINGERPRIV0000025; 7 e SINGERPRIV0000026-28; 8 e SINGERPRIV000008 1-93; 9 e SINGERPRIV0000123-37; 10 e SINGERPRIV0000177-80; 11 e SINGERPRIV0000185-89; 12 e SINGERPRIV0000190-95; 13 e SINGERPRIV0000254-59. 14 5. Defendants have until November 7, 2019 to either (1) produce these documents to 3 15 Plaintiffs; or (2) submit a confidential brief to the Court, without service on Plaintiffs, a 16 setting forth a factual basis for the claim of privilege for any of the documents listed above. = 17 SO ORDERED. 18 Dated: October 31, 2019 — 19 — 90 Sussm Kul— SUSAN VAN KEULEN 21 United States Magistrate Judge — 22 — — 23 — — 24 — — 25 — — 26 — — 27 — — 28 —