Petrageous Designs, Limited v. Olivet International, Inc.

Filing 27

Judge George A. OToole, Jr: ORDER entered granting in part and denying in part 14 Motion to Compel; denying 16 Motion for Protective Order. (Lyness, Paul)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS CIVIL ACTION NO. 14-13582-GAO PETRAGEOUS DESIGNS, LTD., Plaintiff, v. OLIVET INTERNATIONAL, INC., Defendant. ORDER November 6, 2015 O’TOOLE, D.J. After review of the parties’ submissions and hearing, the parties’ pending discovery motions are resolved as follows: 1. Petrageous Designs’ Motion to Compel (dkt. no. 14): The plaintiff’s motion to compel is GRANTED as to Requests for Production Nos. 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, and 20. The defendant shall produce non-privileged documents responsive to the enumerated Requests for Production within twenty-eight (28) days of this Order. The plaintiff’s request for attorney’s fees and costs is DENIED. 2. Olivet International’s Motion for Protective Order (dkt. no. 16): The defendant’s motion for a protective order with an Attorneys’ Eyes Only provision is DENIED. Other less restrictive alternatives are available to help protect the parties from abusive use of sensitive documents, such as a protective order which provides that material designated as confidential can only be used for the purpose of the present litigation, will remain confidential after the case is concluded, and must be returned or destroyed to the producing party at the conclusion of the case. To the extent that there are specific documents of concern, as opposed to general categories, either party may apply to the Court for heightened confidentiality provisions, including Attorneys’ Eyes Only designation, upon a showing of particularized and compelling need. The parties shall confer on a protective order consistent with this Order. It is SO ORDERED. /s/ George A. O’Toole, Jr. United States District 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?