Gerber Scientific, Inc. v. Roland DGA Corp

Filing 412

ORDER re 312 motion to compel. The motion is granted in part and denied in part. See attached order. Signed by Judge Alfred V. Covello on February 28, 2013. (Gentile, N.)

3:06CV2024(AVC) 2/28/2013. The plaintiff’s motion to
compel is granted in part and denied in part. Local rule 26(e)
provides that a privilege log must contain “(1) the type of
document . . . ; (2) the general subject matter of the document
. . .; (3) the date of the document . . .; (4) the author of the
document . . .; and (5) each recipient of the document . . . .”
Loc. R. Civ. P. 26(e). In addition, Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 26(b)(5)(A) provides that a party claiming a document
is privileged must, inter alia, “describe the nature of the
documents [or] communications . . . and do so in a manner that,
without revealing information itself privileged or protected,
will enable other parties to assess the claim.”
The court concludes that the defendant’s privilege log
fails to satisfy those requirements. Specifically, the
defendant’s privilege log fails to sufficiently identify the
subject matter of the documents at issue. The defendant shall
submit an amended privilege log on or before March 11, 2013.
The amended privilege log shall describe the subject matter of
the documents with sufficient detail to allow opposing counsel,
and the court, to determine whether the document is indeed
privileged. See U.S. v. Construction Products Research, Inc.,
73 F.3d 464, 473 (1996) (citing Bowne of New York City, Inc. v.
AmBase Corp., 150 F.R.D. 465, 475 (S.D.N.Y. 1993)).
To the extent that the plaintiff’s motion seeks disclosure
of the author and recipient names, the motion is denied for the
same reasons set forth in the court’s April 18, 2012 order.
The request for attorney’s fees in connection with the
filing of the instant motion is granted.
So ordered.
/s/
_______
Alfred V. Covello, U.S.D.J.