Golden v. BofI Holding, Inc. et al

Filing 189

ORDER Regarding Plaintiffs' First Set of Requests for Production. Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen S. Crawford on 4/13/21.(dlg)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

Case No.: 15-cv-2324-GPC-KSC

In re BofI HOLDING, INC. SECURITIES
LITIGATION

ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFFS’
FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR
PRODUCTION

13
14
15
16
17

The parties have raised several disputes concerning plaintiffs’ First Set of Requests

18

for Production (“RFPs”). Specifically, plaintiffs request documents responsive to RFPs

19

Nos. 8, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 40 and 41. The parties conferred with the Court’s staff regarding

20

these disputes on April 1, 2021, and the subject discovery was lodged with chambers. The

21

Court heard argument from the parties on the disputed discovery on April 13, 2021. Having

22

reviewed the discovery at issue and considered the arguments of counsel, and for the

23

reasons stated during the April 13, 2021 hearing, the Court HEREBY ORDERS as

24

follows:

25

RFP No. 8 seeks the production of John Ball’s personnel file.

The defense

26

represented it is willing to produce Mr. Ball’s entire personnel file. Plaintiff also requested

27

documents relating to the personnel file. As defendants stated that documents related to

28

the personnel file will be produced in response to an unrelated document request, it appears
1
15-cv-2324-GPC-KSC

1

that no further response to RFP No. 8 is necessary. Accordingly, plaintiffs’ request for

2

further responses is DENIED AS MOOT.

3

RFP No. 27 seeks documents concerning Bof I’s whistleblower program. Plaintiffs’

4

request for further responses is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.

5

Defendants shall produce any complaints submitted via BofI’s whistleblower program

6

which allege similar acts or wrongdoing as reported by Mr. Erhardt, as well as the

7

Company’s response to those complaints. Other responsive documents need not be

8

produced.

9

RFP No. 28 seeks documents related to the criminal record or background of the

10

individual referred to in the Third Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 136) as “SVP 1.”

11

Plaintiffs’ request for responsive documents is GRANTED.

12
13

RFP No. 29 seeks documents related to the hiring, discipline, and termination of
BofI employees. Plaintiffs’ request for responsive documents is DENIED.

14

RFP Nos. 30 and 31 seek information regarding related-party transactions and

15

accounts for which the named defendants are owners, trustees or beneficiaries. Plaintiffs’

16

request is GRANTED. The parties are directed to meet and confer regarding the scope of

17

the production, including whether some of the requested information can be produced in

18

summary form. If any responsive information is considered confidential, sensitive, or

19

private, it may be produced pursuant to the parties’ stipulated protective order and

20

designated accordingly. See Doc. Nos. 172, 173.

21

RFP Nos. 40 and 41 seek information concerning BofI officers’ and directors’

22

compensation and transactions in BofI securities.

23

responsive to these RFPs is DENIED.

24

///

25

///

26

///

27

///

28

///

Plaintiffs’ request for documents

2
15-cv-2324-GPC-KSC

1

Defendants shall produce responsive documents as detailed herein within 10

2

business days of the date of this Order. If defendants require additional time to collect,

3

review, and produce responsive documents, the parties shall meet and confer in good faith

4

regarding a schedule for the production of any remaining documents. If the parties cannot

5

so agree, they shall contact the Court for further guidance, in accordance with the

6

undersigned’s Chambers’ Rules.

7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 13, 2021

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
15-cv-2324-GPC-KSC