The Anschutz Corporation v. Merryll Lynch & Co., Inc. et al

Filing 269

ORDER GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL (SI, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/19/2011)

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

THE ANSCHUTZ CORPORATION,

9

Plaintiff,

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

No. C 09-03780 SI
ORDER GRANTING IN PART
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL

v.
MERRILL LYNCH & CO., et al.,

12

Defendants.

/

13
14

Currently before the Court is plaintiff the Anschutz Corporation’s motion to compel defendant

15

McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., d/b/a Standard & Poor’s (“S&P”) to provide additional responses to

16

discovery [Docket No. 267]. The Court has reviewed the parties’ submission and rules as follows:

17
18

1.

Plaintiff’s motion to compel further responses to RFP Nos. 1-5 is GRANTED. In light

19

of the allegations in the complaint, that the Auction Rate Securities (“ARS”) at issue did

20

not deserve the ratings given to them by S&P and the allegations regarding the same

21

defects in S&P’s ratings of residential mortgage backed securities (“RMBS”), the

22

documents sought by plaintiff are relevant and should be produced.

23
24

2.

25

Plaintiff’s motion to compel further responses to RFP Nos. 58-59 is GRANTED. These
documents are relevant for the reasons discussed above.

26
27
28

3.

Plaintiff’s motion to compel a further response to RFP No. 45 is DENIED. Plaintiff has
failed to articulate how requiring S&P to produce documents sufficient to identify each

1

ARS and structured finance product (“SFP”) S&P rated as well as the rating assigned

2

would be relevant or lead to the discovery of relevant evidence in this case. In light of

3

the burden that would be imposed upon S&P if they were required to produce the

4

responsive documents (essentially, requiring S&P to create a detailed chart which does

5

not currently exist), this request will be DENIED.

6
7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

Dated: September 19, 2011
SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2