Medbox Incorporated v. Kaplan et al

Filing 50

ORDER Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs' and Third-Party Plaintiff's 47 MOTION to Quash Portions of Subpoena to Envy Tech Fund I, LLC and Envy-Medvend Loan Fun, LLC. (Fact Discovery due by 9/30/2015. **PLEASE SEE ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL DEADLINES**) Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (HMon)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
PVMI INTERNATIONAL,
INC., assignee of MEDBOX
INCORPORATED,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 13-14775
Hon. Matthew F. Leitman

v.
DARRYL B. KAPLAN et al.,
Defendants and Counter-Plaintiffs,
v.
MEDBOX INCORPORATED,
Counter-Defendant

MEDVEND HOLDINGS, LLC,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 14-11749
(consolidated with Case No. 13-14775)

v.
MEDBOX INCORPORATED,
Defendant.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTSCOUNTER PLAINTIFFS’ AND THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
TO QUASH PORTIONS OF SUBPOENA TO ENVY TECH FUND I, LLC
AND ENVY-MEDVEND LOAN FUND, LLC (ECF #47)

On June 19, 2015, the Court heard oral argument on the motion by
Defendants-Counter Plaintiffs Darryl B. Kaplan, Claudio Tartaglia, and Eric
Kovan, and Third-Party Plaintiff Medvend Holdings, LLC, to quash portions of the
subpoenas to Envy Tech Fund I, LLC (ECF #48-4) and Envy-Medvend Loan
Fund, LLC (ECF #48-3, collectively “the Supoenas”).

(See the “Motion to

Quash,” ECF #47.) For the reasons stated on the record at the hearing, IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion to Quash is GRANTED IN PART and
DENIED IN PART, as follows.
The Motion to Quash is GRANTED to the extent that the Subpoenas seek
documents (1) “exchanged … during settlement negotiations” and (2) “authored or
created for the purpose of settlement negotiations.” Graff v. Haverhill North Coke
Co., No. 09-670, 2012 WL 5495514, at *32 (S.D. Ohio Nov. 13, 2012)
(interpreting Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Chiles Power Supply, Inc., 332 F.3d
976 (6th Cir. 2003)).

These documents are protected by the privilege for

communications made in furtherance of settlement recognized in Goodyear, supra.
Counsel for Defendants-Counter Plaintiffs and Third-Party Plaintiff shall serve
upon the opposing parties a privilege log containing a brief description of all
responsive documents that are withheld pursuant to the Goodyear privilege (or any
claimed privilege).

2

The Motion to Quash is DENIED to the extent that the Subpoenas seek any
final, executed settlement agreement and attachments or exhibits thereto. Counsel
for Defendants-Counter Plaintiffs and Third-Party Plaintiff shall produce these
documents to the Court for the Court’s in camera review by no later than July 13,
2015. Documents produced to the Court shall be Bates stamped or otherwise
numbered. The Court will review all documents produced by Defendants-Counter
Plaintiffs and Third-Party Plaintiff to determine their relevance to this action.
Counsel for Plaintiff-Counter Defendant may submit a supplemental notice
describing its theories of the possible relevance of the requested materials by no
later than July 3, 2015. Counsel for Defendants-Counter Plaintiffs and Third Party
Plaintiff may respond by no later than July 10, 2015.
IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that the fact discovery cut-off date shall be
September 30, 2015.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Matthew F. Leitman
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: June 22, 2015
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties
and/or counsel of record on June 22, 2015, by electronic means and/or ordinary
mail.
s/Holly A. Monda
Case Manager
[phone]

3