Nye v. Burberry Limited

Filing 69

ORDER denying 63 Motion; The parties are ordered to submit a revised scheduling order within 14 days of this order. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 9/26/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7
8

BRETT NYE, individually and on behalf of all
other similarly situated,

ORDER
Plaintiff(s),

9
10
11
12

Case No. 2:16-cv-00702-RFB-DJA

v.
BURBERRY LIMITED
Defendant(s).

13
14

Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Preclude Disclosure [ECF No. 63]. Defendant

15

argues that the Court should not prevent discovery of putative plaintiffs who may be subject to an

16

arbitration agreement which would prevent their participation in any collective action in this case.

17

Defendant also argues that such information is confidential and its production would raise privacy

18

issues. Plaintiff argues that the Court has yet to determine the effect or not of the alleged arbitration

19
20

agreement on these putative class members. Plaintiff further argues that information regarding

21

these so-called arbitration plaintiffs would nonetheless be relevant to Plaintiff’s theory of liability

22

as to the scheme employed by the Defendant regarding alleged violations of federal law.

23
24

The Court finds that discovery shall proceed and apply to all 46 individuals. The Court
finds that their employment records are relevant and necessary to Plaintiff’s case. The Court does

25
26

not find that such production would be overly burdensome in this case. The Court further notes

27

that it has not ruled about the effect of the alleged arbitration clause in this case and whether or not

28

it would preclude participation in a collective action in this case. Finally, the Court notes that issues

1

of privacy can be addressed by a protective order that prevents Plaintiff from publicly disclosing

2

the confidential information shared in discovery regarding these 46 individuals.

3

Accordingly,

4
5

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Preclude Disclosure is

6

[ECF No. 63] is DENIED. The parties are ordered to submit a revised scheduling order within 14

7

days of this order.

8

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall not publicly disclose any of the

9

confidential information produced by Defendant in this case regarding the aforementioned 46

10

individuals.

11
12

DATED: September 26, 2019.

13

__________________________________
RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-