Le et al v. Zuffa, LLC, et al.
ORDER regarding further production of records by non-party Zinkin Entertainment, LLC. Order signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 7/26/2017. (Rooney, M)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
In Re Subpoena Of
Case No. 1:17-mc-00028
ZINKIN ENTERTAINMENT, LLC
Underlying Case No.: 2:15-cv-01045 RFBPAL (D. Nev.)
Cung Le, Nathan Quarry, Jon Fitch,
Brandon Vera, Luis Javier Vazquez
and Kyle Kingsbury, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly
Zuffa, LLC, d/b/a Ultimate Fighting
Championship and UFC,
ORDER RE; FURTHER
PRODUCTION OF RECORDS BY
On June 23, 2017, at 11:00 a.m., in Courtroom 10 of the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of California, Plaintiffs’ Motion Re: Discovery
Disagreement came on regularly for hearing before the Honorable Erica P. Grossjean,
Magistrate Judge. Plaintiffs appeared by and through their legal counsel Robert Maysey
and James Valletta of Warner, Angle, Hallam, Jackson & Formanek, PC; Non-Party
Zinkin Entertainment, LLC, appeared by and through its legal counsel, James B. Betts, of
Betts & Rubin.
First, this motion arises out of Plaintiffs’ request for an order compelling Non-Party
Zinkin Entertainment to produce further documents within its custody relating to certain
of its clients who were or are professional mixed martial arts fighters, and which are
responsive to a document subpoena served by Plaintiffs’ in December, 2015, and to which
Zinkin Entertainment responded to, in part, in February, 2016.
Second, this Court notes that this action has been brought on behalf of two (2)
potential classes of professional MMA fighters, to wit:
The “Bout Class” consisting of all persons who competed in one or
more live professional UFC-promoted MMA Bouts taking place or
broadcast in the Class Period; and
The “Identity Class” consisting of each and every UFC fighter whose
identity was expropriated or exploited by the UFC Promotional
Materials, during the Class Period in the United States.
Third, Plaintiffs’ complaint defines the “Class Period” as December 16, 2010 to the
present. (Complaint, ¶30(g)).
Fourth, documents produced in response to said subpoena have been, and will be,
produced pursuant to the “Attorney’s Eyes Only” provision of the attached Revised
Stipulation and Protective Order.
Fifth, Zinkin Entertainment has already produced responsive documents within its
care, custody and control relating to any of its clients who are named Plaintiffs in this
Sixth, for purposes of this Order, Plaintiffs propose including the following
definition: “Documents” shall have the meaning conferred by Rule 34 of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure.
Seventh, having considered the parties’ Joint Statement Re: Discovery
Disagreement and the oral argument of counsel, the Court hereby orders as follows:
Non-Party Zinkin Entertainment shall produce to Plaintiffs, subject to the
“Attorney’s Eyes Only” provisions of the attached Protective Order, all Documents,
contracts, communications and/or correspondence with any MMA Promoters and any
MMA Sponsors in its possession, if any, relating to any of Zinkin Entertainment’s clients
that fall within the definition of the “Bout Class” or “Identity Class”, set forth above, for
the period 2005 through the date of Plaintiff’s subpoena to Zinkin Entertainment. The
documents to be produced include Documents, communications, or records which relate
to or arise out of issues concerning said clients’ “image and likeness” or any other
Documents which show income received by Zinkin Entertainment’s clients from sources
other than MMA Promoters related to their profession as an MMA Fighter, their image
and likeness, and all related Documents from Zinkin representatives DeWayne Zinkin and
Robert Cook to or from any Zinkin Entertainment clients. Plaintiffs have offered to
provide a third party discovery vendor to Zinkin Entertianment to collect this information,
at Plaintiff’s expense.
Zinkin Entertainment shall produce responsive records within ten (10) days of the
Court’s issuance of this order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
July 26, 2017
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?