Gojo Industries, Inc. v. Innovative Biodefense, Inc. et al

Filing 126

OPINION & ORDER: The discovery stay is lifted, and the parties should resume discovery. The Court rules as follows on the pending discovery motions: IBD's February 12, 2016 motion for the production of GOJO's formula information (Dkt. 115 ). The motion is DENIED. IBD has failed to demonstrate the relevance of GOJOs formula information to GOJO's claims or IBDs counterclaims. IBD's February 12, 2016 motion opposing the clawback of inadvertently produced documents (Dkt. 116) . The motion is DENIED. IBD's waiver argument fails because the Stipulated Protective Order provides that inadvertently disclosed information "shall not constitute or be deemed a waiver or forfeiture." In accordance with the Protect ive Order, IBD should return or destroy the inadvertently produced documents. If IBD believes any of those documents are not subject to the attorney-client privilege or work product protection, it can raise those claims on the merits and on a docume nt-by document basis.IBD's January 26, 2016 motion to compel production of certain categories of documents (Dkt. 105). Based on GOJOs letter of April 20, 2016, the Court understands that GOJO will produce documents responsive to requests 1, 2, 4-7, 13-15, 17 and 18; but objects to document requests 8, 9, 10, 12 and 16 (Dkt. 125). If, after reviewing the newly produced documents, IBD still believes that GOJO's production is deficient, the parties should meet-and-confer to attempt to r esolve the dispute. Absent resolution, the parties should be prepared to argue the remaining disputes at the conference scheduled for May 12, 2016, at 3:30 pm. At the May 12 conference, the parties should be prepared to discuss any remaining discovery issues and set a date for trial. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Crotty on April 21, 2016) (mov)

-

---~-·-----·--======

fusD-C-.SDNY
.

,,.

jDOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

l

------------------------------------------------------------)(

IDOC#:
-.JDATE ·FILED:··- - - .....____, _ _ __ __,____J:
_--.:l_~l =-1_~--•,
-·----- - - - - - - · -

GOJO INDUSTRIES, INC.,

Plaintiff,

15 Civ. 2946 (PAC)

-againstOPINION & ORDER

INNOVATIVE BIODEFENSE, INC.,

Defendant.

------------------------------------------------------------)(
HONORABLE PAUL A. CROTTY, United States District Judge:
The discovery stay is lifted, and the parties should resume discovery. The Court rules as
follows on the pending discovery motions:
•

IBD's February 12,2016 motion for the production ofGOJO's formula information

(Dkt. 115). The motion is DENIED. IBD has failed to demonstrate the relevance of
GOJO ' s formula information to GOJO 's claims or IBD's counterclaims.
•

IBD's February 12, 2016 motion opposing the clawback of inadvertently produced

documents (Dkt. 116). The motion is DENIED. IBD's waiver argument fails because
the Stipulated Protective Order provides that inadvertently disclosed information "shall
not constitute or be deemed a waiver or forfeiture." In accordance with the Protective
Order, IBD should return or destroy the inadvertently produced documents. IfiBD
believes any of those documents are not subject to the attorney-client privilege or
work-product protection, it can raise those claims on the merits and on a documentby-document basis.
•

IBD's January 26, 2016 motion to compel production of certain categories of

1

documents (Dkt. 105). Based on GOJO 's letter of April20, 2016, the Court understands
that GOJO will produce documents responsive to requests 1, 2, 4-7, 13-15, 17 and 18 ; but
objects to document requests 8, 9, 10, 12 and 16 (Dkt. 125). If, after reviewing the newly
produced documents, IBD still believes that GOJO's production is deficient, the parties
should meet-and-confer to attempt to resolve the dispute. Absent resolution, the parties
should be prepared to argue the remaining disputes at the conference scheduled for May
12,2016, at 3:30pm.
•

At the May 12 conference, the parties should be prepared to discuss any remaining
discovery issues and set a date for trial.

Dated: New York, New York
Aprillli], 2016

SO ORDERED

PAUL A. CROTTY
United States District Judge

2