Perez et al v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company et al

Filing 311

ORDER GRANTING-IN-PART AND DENYING-IN-PART PLAINTIFFS' FURTHER MOTION TO COMPEL re 305 Letter filed by Sarah Perez. Signed by Judge Paul S. Grewal on April 29, 2011. (psglc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/29/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11

SAN JOSE DIVISION

12
13
14
15
16
17

SARAH PEREZ, ET AL.,

)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
v.
)
)
STATE FARM MUTUAL
)
AUTOMOBILE INS. CO., ET AL.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
__________________________________ )

Case No.: C-06-01962 JW (PSG)
ORDER GRANTING-IN-PART AND
DENYING-IN-PART PLAINTIFFS’
FURTHER MOTION TO COMPEL
(Docket No. 305)

18
This morning the parties appeared on a variety of discovery issues presented in Plaintiffs'
19
April 26, 2011 letter to the court (Docket No. 305). After reviewing both Plaintiffs' letter and a
20
responsive letter filed by Defendant Allstate Indemnity Company ("Allstate") (Docket No. 304),
21
and in light of the arguments presented at this morning's hearing, the court HEREBY ORDERS:
22
1.

Plaintiffs' request for further explanatory information allowing use of data, pursuant to its

23
Document Request No. 3, is DENIED. Plaintiffs have failed to establish why the court should
24
not accept Allstate's representation that it has no such information in its possession, custody or
25
control. As the court has previously explained, as the party seeking production, the burden of
26
proof in any dispute regarding control of third-party documents falls squarely on Plaintiffs. See
27
Docket No. 295 at 4. The court further reiterates its suggestion made many weeks ago that
28
Plaintiffs pursue such information by way of a subpoena to Audatex.
ORDER, page 1

1

2.

Plaintiffs' request for data distinguishing OEM and non-OEM parts is GRANTED as

2

follows. No later than May 13, 2011, Allstate shall supplement the report bearing the Bates

3

number ALLSTATE 0007982 by identifying, for each line item entry, the PART_CNT and

4

TOTAL_PRICE_AMT figures by aftermarket, OEM, non-OEM, and recycled parts. The court

5

notes that at the hearing Plaintiffs withdrew their request for data distinguishing crash and non-

6

crash parts.

7

3.

8

produced by Allstate is GRANTED. Based on the representation of counsel, the court

9

understands that such replacement files have already been produced. To the extent that any

10

replacement files have not been produced, Allstate shall produce them no later than May 13,

11

2011.

12

4.

13

1(a) and 1(b), and aggregate data for various risk factors pursuant to its Document Request No.

14

1(c) is DENIED. At the hearing, and without first presenting the proposal to Allstate during the

15

mandatory meet-and-confer ordered by the court, Plaintiffs presented an alternative proposal for

16

satisfying Plaintiffs' request. Under this proposal, Allstate would produce data from the three-

17

year period previously ordered by the court that is aggregated by year, make, and model together

18

with a tally of the number of insured in each of Allstate's rating categories. Because Allstate and

19

the court had no advance notice of this proposal, the parties are to meet and confer on this no

20

later than May 6, 2011. To the extent Allstate may secure such data from Audatex, or any

21

further alternative the parties can agree to, it shall do so no later than May 13, 2011. If Allstate

22

is not able to provide such data, by May 13, 2011, it shall file a sworn declaration detailing its

23

inability to produce the data.

24

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Plaintiffs' request for replacement files for various corrupted or truncated data files

Plaintiff's request for individual data requested pursuant to its Document Request No.

25
Dated: April 29, 2011
26
27

PAUL S. GREWAL
United States Magistrate Judge

28
ORDER, page 2