Lowell et al v. United Behavioral Health et al

Filing 43

ORDER RE:JOINT DISCOVERY LETTER BRIEF re 42 Joint Discovery Letter Brief filed by Tamar Lowell, Thomas Lowell. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 10/15/2020. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/15/2020)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5
6

TAMAR LOWELL, ET AL.,
Plaintiffs,

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

CASE NO. 20-cv-01989-YGR
ORDER RE: JOINT DISCOVERY LETTER
BRIEF

vs.
UNITED BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, ET AL.,

Re: Dkt. No. 42

Defendants.
The Court is in receipt of the discovery dispute memorialized at Docket Number 42.

12

Having reviewed and considered the arguments made therein, and the attachments submitted

13

therewith, the Court issues the following Order, organized using the framework in the letter brief:

14

1. Defendants shall produce documents in response to Requests for Production #4 to UBH

15

and #2 to UHIC sufficient to show the administrative service agreements between those

16

parties governing during the Relevant Period as defined in the discovery.

17

2. Defendants shall produce documents in response to Request for Production #7 to UBH

18

sufficient to show the training of the two reviewers who denied plaintiffs’ request for

19

coverage on how to use the Level of Care Guidelines.

20

3. With respect to Requests for Production #11 and #12 to UBH, the request to compel is

21

denied without prejudice if the plaintiffs can make a more specific showing. At present,

22

the request appears to be a fishing expedition.

23

4. Defendants shall Admit or Deny the Request for Admission #10.

24

5. With respect to the request for responses to Interrogatories #1 and #2 to UHIC, the request

25

to compel is denied without prejudice to show how such information is probative of any

26

element of any claim pending before this Court.

27

The parties are advised that if plaintiffs can articulate how discovery is probative of an

28

element of a pending claim, then limited discovery should be produced. Boilerplate responses to

1

the same will be stricken. Failure to comply necessitating any further involvement from this Court

2

on discovery disputes may result in the issuance of sanctions.

3

Defendants shall respond as set forth herein within 21 days of this Order.

4

This Order terminates Docket Number 42.

5

IT IS SO ORDERED.

6
7

Dated: October 15, 2020
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

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