HAWKINS v. ALORICA INCORPORATED

Filing 88

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 73 Motion to Compel. The Magistrate Judge TAKES UNDER ADVISEMENT whether any additional data must be produced until after the results of the random sampling are analyzed and the costs of further production are better defined. Signed by Magistrate Judge William G. Hussmann, Jr., on 7/20/2012. (NRN)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
TERRE HAUTE DIVISION

Written
Opinion
Under the E-Government Act and
Judicial Conference policy

RENEE M. HAWKINS, individually and
on behalf of others similarly situated,
Plaintiff,
v.
ALORICA, INCORPORATED,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

2:11-cv-283-JMS-WGH

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
This matter is before the Honorable William G. Hussmann, Jr., United
States Magistrate Judge, on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Discovery filed June 26,
2012. (Docket Nos. 73-74).1 Defendant filed a Memorandum of Law in
Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel on July 13, 2012. (Docket No. 84).
Plaintiff’s Reply in Support of Her Motion to Compel Discovery was filed on July
18, 2012. (Docket No. 85).
The Magistrate Judge, being duly advised, hereby GRANTS, in part, and
DENIES, in part, the Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Discovery.
The Magistrate Judge finds that the “login/logout data” requested is
relevant and the need for its production is not rendered moot by any stipulation
as to numerosity. However, the request for all 4,080 customer service

1

The Magistrate Judge finds that no hearing is necessary.

representatives may be unduly broad and burdensome. Defendant shall provide
the “login/logout data” in native format for a random sampling of not less than
960 customer service representatives for the time period commencing on October
18, 2011, and ending on April 18, 2012. Plaintiff may designate the manner in
which the random sample is selected. The Magistrate Judge TAKES UNDER
ADVISEMENT whether any additional data must be produced until after the
results of the random sampling are analyzed and the costs of further production
are better defined.
SO ORDERED the 20th day July, 2012.

__________________________
William G. Hussmann, Jr.
United States Magistrate Judge
Southern District of Indiana

Electronic copies to:
Peter N. Farley
SUTHERLAND ASBILL AND BRENNAN LLP
[e-mail]
Gregory W. Guevara
BOSE MCKINNEY & EVANS, LLP
[e-mail]
Katherine Kendricks
SUTHERLAND ASBILL AND BRENNAN LLP
[e-mail]
Robert Peter Kondras Jr.
HUNT HASSLER & LORENZ LLP
[e-mail]
Allegra J. Lawrence-Hardy
SUTHERLAND ASBILL AND BRENNAN LLP
[e-mail]

-2-

Kurt E. Lentz
SUTHERLAND ASBILL AND BRENNAN LLP
[e-mail]
Andrew M. McNeil
BOSE MCKINNEY & EVANS, LLP
[e-mail]

-3-