Taser International, Inc. v. Phazzer Electronics, Inc. et al

Filing 102

**VACATED PER #103 ORDER** ORDER granting #94 Motion to Compel production of documents. See order for details. Signed by Magistrate Judge Karla R. Spaulding on 3/9/2017. (Spaulding, Karla) Modified on 3/9/2017 (LMM).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No: 6:16-cv-366-Orl-40KRS

PHAZZER ELECTRONICS, INC., SANG
MIN INTERNATIONAL CO., LTD. and
DOUBLE DRAGON DEVELOPMENT
AND TRADING CORPORATION,
Defendants.

ORDER
This cause came on for consideration without oral argument on the following motion filed
herein:
MOTION:

PLAINTIFF’S SECOND MOTION TO COMPEL
DOCUMENTS (Doc. No. 94)

FILED:

February 20, 2017

Plaintiff served Defendant Phazzer Electronics, Inc. (“Phazzer”) with requests for
production of documents in August 2016, including requests for documents showing sales and
profits (Requests 15, 16, 19, 20, 23, 24, 62, and 63). Phazzer originally objected based on
confidentiality. As a result, the parties entered a confidentiality agreement that addressed Phazzer’s
confidentiality objections. Phazzer then produced a single-page summary of sales, but failed to
produce the source documents, such as invoices. After Plaintiff threatened to file a motion to
compel, Phazzer produced redacted invoices.

Plaintiff now moves to compel production of

unredacted documents responsive to Requests 15, 16, 19, 20, 23, 24, 62, and 63.

Plaintiff filed its motion to compel on February 20, 2017. Under Local Rule 3.01(b) and
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6, Phazzer’s response was due on March 6, 2017.1 That deadline
has passed, and, at the time of the writing of this Order, Phazzer has not filed a response. Thus, the
Court considers Plaintiff’s motion to be unopposed, and it is GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that, on or before March 20, 2017, Phazzer shall produce for
inspection and copying all documents in its possession that are responsive to Requests 15, 16, 19,
20, 23, 24, 62, and 63. To the extent that Phazzer has documents responsive to Requests 15, 16,
19, 20, 23, 24, 62, or 63 that have not yet been produced (including the source documents used to
create summary documents previously produced and documents showing pricing details), Phazzer
shall produce those documents. Phazzer shall produce all documents in unredacted form. No
additional objections may be raised to the production.
DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on March 9, 2017.

Karla R. Spaulding
KARLA R. SPAULDING
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1
Effective December 1, 2016, Rule 6 no longer allows for an additional 3 days to respond to papers served via
electronic filing, such as Plaintiff’s motion to compel. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d).

-2-