Stender et al v. Archstone-Smith Operating Trust

Filing 503

MINUTE ORDER denying 496 Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel the 2013 Defendants to Produce Documents and Corrected Discovery Requests, by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe on 3/17/2016.(emill)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 07-cv-02503-WJM-MJW
STEVEN A. STENDER, and
INFINITY CLARK STREET OPERATING, L.L.C.,
on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.
ARCHSTONE-SMITH OPERATING TRUST, et al.,
Defendants.
MINUTE ORDER
Entered By Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe
It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel the 2013 Defendants to
Produce Documents and Corrected Discovery Requests (Docket No. 496) is DENIED
for the following reasons.
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide:
Parties may obtain discovery regarding any nonprivileged matter that is
relevant to any party's claim or defense and proportional to the needs of
the case, considering [1] the importance of the issues at stake in the
action, [2] the amount in controversy, [3] the parties’ relative access to
relevant information, [4] the parties’ resources, [5] the importance of the
discovery in resolving the issues, and [6] whether the burden or expense
of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit. Information within
this scope of discovery need not be admissible in evidence to be
discoverable.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b). Plaintiffs correctly point out that the first two factors weigh in favor
of enforcing the propounded discovery. The third and fourth factors are at least neutral,
and might weigh in Plaintiffs’ favor as well. But the final two factors weigh heavily in
favor of denying this motion and, in this instance, the Court finds them to be dispositive.
Plaintiffs’ theory of relevance is thinly attenuated and is likely to produce only minimal
benefit. Meanwhile, the process of searching for responsive documents that are neither
privileged nor duplicative of the million pages already produced by other Defendants will
be highly burdensome.

If Plaintiffs can narrow their requests (for example, requesting specific
documents or notes, after such documents have been identified through other means,
such as by deposition testimony), such requests might be appropriate. But the
discovery requested in this motion (Docket No. 496) is highly burdensome and not
proportional to the needs of the case.
Date: March 17, 2016