Cellport Systems, Inc. v. Peiker Acustic GMBH & Co. KG

Filing 183

MINUTE ORDER denying 172 Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Production of Mettenheimer Correspondence. Documents bates stamped PEIKER 025512, 025513 and 025515 through 025527, inclusive, and the English translation of the same shall be SEALED and not opened except by further Order of Court, by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe on 08/31/2011.(wjc, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 09-cv-01007-MSK-MJW
CELLPORT SYSTEMS, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
PEIKER ACOUSTIC GMBH & CO. KG,
Defendant.
MINUTE ORDER
Entered by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe
It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Production of
Mettenheimer Correspondence (docket no.172) is DENIED for the following reasons.
After reviewing, in camera, the disputed e-mail chain that includes an English
translation marked as bates stamped documents PEIKER 025512, 025513 and 025515
through 025527, inclusive, I find that documents [e-mails] PEIKER 025512, 025513 and
025515 through 025527, inclusive, are protected by the attorney-client privilege and the
work product doctrine pursuant to Upjohn Co. v. United States, 449 U.S. 383, 389
(1981), and Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, 508-10 (1947) . In this case, I find that
Defendant Pieker has met its burden and has demonstrated that the communications
[e-mails listed above] were communications made by Defendant Peiker’s counsel and
that such communications consisted of legal counsel or advice and that the e-mails
listed above are protected under the attorney-client privilege. In addition, I find that
these e-mails listed above are also protected by the work product doctrine since they
were prepared in anticipation of litigation by another party or that party’s representative,
and were intended to remain confidential. See In re Gibco, Inc., 185 F.R.D. 296, 298
(D. Colo. 1997)(citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(3)). Lastly, I find that Defendant Peiker has
not waived its attorney-client privilege either impliedly or expressly as to the disputed emails listed above. For these reasons, the subject motion (docket no. 172) should be
denied.
It is FURTHER ORDERED that documents bates stamped PEIKER 025512,
025513 and 025515 through 025527, inclusive, and the English translation of the same
shall be SEALED and not opened except by further Order of Court.
Date: August 31, 2011