Viesti Associates, Inc. v. Pearson Education, Inc.

Filing 155

ORDER denying 102 Defendant's MOTION to Compel. By Magistrate Judge David L. West on 8/14/13. (mnfsl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Magistrate Judge David L. West
VIESTI ASSOCIATES, INC.,

Civil Action No. 12-CV-01431-PAB-DLW

Plaintiff,
vs.
PEARSON EDUCATION, INC. and
John Doe Printers 1 - 10,
Defendant(s).
______________________________________________________________________________
VIESTI ASSOCIATES, INC.,

Civil Action No. 11-CV-01687-PAB-DLW

Plaintiff,
vs.
PEARSON EDUCATION, INC.,
Defendant.

ORDER RE: IN CAMERA REVIEW RE: DEFENDANT’S
MOTIONS TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS [DOCS. #61 and #102]

ORDER ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE DAVID L. WEST
An in camera discovery review of documents 044331 thru 041409 submitted pursuant to
Defendant’s Motions to Compel [Docs. #61 and #102] was conducted by Magistrate Judge on
August 13, 2013 at 3:00 p.m. and:

1
THE COURT FINDS AS FOLLOWS:

1. The following documents are NOT DISCOVERABLE and Defendant’s Motions to
Compel are DENIED as to the highlighted lines, as the documents were prepared in anticipation
of litigation per Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(3):
044331
044332
044342 (as to entire document)
044343
044344
044345
044346
044349
044351
044352
044353
044355
044356
044357
044358
044359
044360
044361
044362
044363
044364
044365
044366
044367
044368
044369
044370
044371
044372
044373
044374
044377
044378
044379
044380
044381
2
044382
044383
044384

044385
044386
044387
044388
044389
044390
044391
044392
044393
044394
044395
044396
044398 (and attorney work product)
044399 (and attorney work product)
044401 (and attorney work product)
044402 (and attorney work product)
044403 (and attorney work product)
044404 (and attorney work product)
044405 (and attorney work product)
044406 (and attorney work product)
044407 (and attorney work product)
044408 (and attorney work product)
044409 (and attorney work product)
2. The following documents ARE DISCOVERABLE and Defendant’s Motions to Compel
are GRANTED, as the documents do not fall within the Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(3), work product or
attorney client privileges:
044333
044338 (as to highlighted lines)
044340
044341 (as to highlighted lines)
044347
044348
044350
044354 (assignment is subject matter of this litigation).

3. The following documents are NOT DISCOVERABLE and Defendant’s Motions to
Compel are DENIED, as the documents are covered by attorney work product doctrine:

3

044334
044335
044339
4. The following documents are NOT DISCOVERABLE and Defendant’s Motions to
Compel are DENIED, as the documents are covered by attorney-client privilege:
044336
044337 (as to highlighted lines)
044397.
DATED: August 14, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
s/David L. West
United States Magistrate Judge

NOTICE: Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a), “[w]ithin 14 days after being served with
a copy of the magistrate’s order, a party may serve and file objections to the order; a party may
not thereafter assign as error a defect in the magistrate judge’s order to which objection was
not timely made. The district judge to whom the case is assigned shall consider such objections
and shall modify or set aside any portion of the magistrate judge’s order found to be clearly
erroneous or contrary to law.” See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) (“a judge of the court may
reconsider any pretrial matter under this subparagraph (A) where it has been shown that the
magistrate’s order is clearly erroneous or contrary to law.”).

4