ViaTech Technologies Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation

Filing 274

MEMORANDUM ORDER Denying MOTION to Alter or Amend the Court's January 5th Memorandum Order (D.I. 206 in 14-cv-1226-RGA, and D.I. 30 in 16-mc-232-RGA). Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 3/2/2017. (nms)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE VIATECH TECH. INC., Plaintiff, No. 14-cv-1226 (RGA) v. MICROSOFT CORP., Defendant. MICROSOFT CORP., Movant, No. 16-mc-232 (RGA) v. RANDOM PERSPECTIVES, LLC., Respondent. MEMORANDUM ORDER The person asserting a claim of privilege bears the burden of establishing its application. In re Grand Jury Investigation, 918 F.2d 374, 385 nt. 15 (3rd Cir. 1990). When Random Perspectives submitted a deposition transcript suggesting that the attorney-client relationship started in May and a purportedly privileged document with an April date without addressing the gap, it failed to meet that burden. Now Random Perspectives asks the Court to correct its error. (D.I. 206). The deposition transcript and declaration Random Perspectives submits to support this request was available to them all along. Thus, it does not support a reconsideration motion on its own. Further, Random Perspectives has not explained why exposure of this document would harm it other than the generic claim that it is privileged. (See D.I. 206 at 6). The document does not speak for itself in this regard. On this showing, I cannot find manifest injustice would occur if Random Perspectives is ordered to produce this document. Random Perspectives's motion for reconsideration is DENIED. Random Perspectives is directed to produce document 1. IT IS SO ORDERED this A day of March 2017. lAw(~~ United State~istrict Judge 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?