Simi Management Corporation v. Bank of America Corporation

Filing 65

Order by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu granting in part and denying in part 47 Discovery Letter Brief.(dmrlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/16/2013)

Download PDF
Case4:11-cv-05573-DMR Document63 Filed01/15/13 Page1 of 2 1 2 3 DONALD J. PUTTERMAN (BAR NO. 90822) WILLIAM A. LOGAN, JR. (BAR NO. 115042) ANTHONY D. GILES (BAR NO. 178876) PUTTERMAN LOGAN & GILES LLP 580 California Street, 16th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 4 5 Mail service address: 2175 N. California Blvd, Suite 805 Walnut Creek, California 94596 6 7 Tel: (415) 839-8779 Fax: (415) 376-0956 E-mail: 8 9 Attorneys for Plaintiff Simi Management Corporation 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 13 SIMI MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, dba CONNELL AUTO CENTER, No. 4:11-cv-05573-DMR 14 [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING IN PART MOTION TO COMPEL OF PLAINTIFF SIMI MANAGEMENT CORP AND ORDERING FURTHER MEET AND CONFER Plaintiff, 15 v. 16 BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION, 17 18 Defendant. Date: January 10, 2013 Time: 11:00 a.m. 19 Before the Honorable Donna M. Ryu 20 21 Pursuant to this Court’s Standing Order revised as of July 3, 2012, the Motion of Plaintiff 22 Simi Management Corp., dba Connell Auto Center (“Connell Auto”) to Compel Production of 23 Documents by defendant Bank of America, N.A. (“BofA”) was submitted pursuant to a Joint Letter 24 filed December 21, 2012. Pursuant to this Court’s order issued January 4, 2013, a hearing was held 25 on January 10, 2013, at 11:00 a.m., with lead trial counsel for each of the parties appearing. Neither 26 of the parties requested further briefing and following oral argument, the Court announced the 27 following rulings: 28 1 4:11-CV-05573-DMR ORDER GRANTING IN PART MOTION TO COMPEL Case4:11-cv-05573-DMR Document63 Filed01/15/13 Page2 of 2 1 1. Connell Auto’s motion was granted as to Request Numbers 1 – 3 except that they are 2 limited to the period of November 1, 2001, to and including August 2007. The Court rejected BofA’s 3 argument that any of the responsive materials are subject to the privilege for Suspicious Activity 4 Reports; 5 2. The Court ruled that the documents requested by Request Numbers 4 – 27 are relevant 6 for the period of November 1, 2001, to and including the present, yet the Court is also sensitive to the 7 potential burden on BofA in searching for responsive documents. Accordingly, the Court orders 8 counsel for the parties to further meet and confer regarding these requests in order to determine ways 9 that the requests could be reframed and/or limited so as to minimize the burden on BofA and report 10 11 back to the Court in a further joint letter on or before Friday, January 18, 2013; 3. Connell Auto’s motion was granted as to Request Numbers 28 – 31 and the Court 12 overruled BofA’s blanket objection based on the privilege for Suspicious Activity Reports. BofA 13 shall produce all documents responsive to Request Number 28 – 31, subject to only the following 14 exceptions: (a) Suspicious Activity Reports; (b) drafts of Suspicious Activity Reports; and 15 (c) references in any other documents to Suspicious Activity Reports, said documents to be produced 16 subject with redactions for only references to a Suspicious Activity Report or the absence of a 17 Suspicious Activity Report. 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 20 January 16, 2013 Dated: _________________________ ________________________________ DONNA M. RYU United States Magistrate Judge 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 4:11-CV-05573-DMR ORDER GRANTING IN PART MOTION TO COMPEL

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?