DoubleLine Capital LP et al v. Odebrecht Finance, Ltd et al

Filing 122

ORDER: For the reasons stated on the record during the October 13 conference, it is hereby ORDERED that: No later than November 12, 2020, defendants shall produce all nonprivileged documents responsive to plaintiffs' Requests for Production (RFP) Nos. 1, 3, and 4,as narrowed by plaintiffs in their September 1, 2020 letter-motion and their correspondence with defendants. Defendants shall file their protective order motion with respect to RFP No. 5 no later than November 12, 2020, sup ported by "information of sufficient particularity and specificity to allow the Court to determine whether the discovery sought is indeed prohibited by foreign law." (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses on 10/14/2020) (cf)

Case 1:17-cv-04576-GHW-BCM Document 122 Filed 10/14/20 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

10/14/20

DOUBLELINE CAPITAL LP, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

17-CV-4576 (GHW) (BCM)
ORDER

-againstODEBRECHT FINANCE, LTD., et al.,
Defendants.
BARBARA MOSES, United States Magistrate Judge.

The Court conducted a telephonic discovery conference on October 13, 2020. Prior to the
conference, the Court received and reviewed: (1) plaintiffs' letter-motion dated September 1, 2020
(Dkt. No. 114), seeking an order compelling document discovery from defendants; (2) defendants'
letter in opposition dated September 4, 2020 (Dkt. No. 115); (3) plaintiffs' reply letter dated
September 9, 2020 (Dkt. No. 116); and (4) the parties' joint letter dated October 9, 2020 (Dkt. No.
120), updating the Court with new developments.
For the reasons stated on the record during the October 13 conference, it is hereby
ORDERED that:
1.

Requests for Production Nos. 1, 3, and 4
No later than November 12, 2020, defendants shall produce all nonprivileged
documents responsive to plaintiffs' Requests for Production (RFP) Nos. 1, 3, and 4,
as narrowed by plaintiffs in their September 1, 2020 letter-motion and their
correspondence with defendants. Defendants need not make this production
separately from their production in response to plaintiffs' remaining RFPs, and need
not specifically identify which documents are responsive to Nos. 1, 3, and 4.
However, if any individual documents (or groups of documents) responsive to Nos.
1, 3, and 4 are withheld on privilege grounds, they must be identified and logged in
compliance with Local Civil Rule 26.2.
In advance of defendants' production (and as promptly as possible), the parties shall
file a stipulated protective order. To the extent any issues arise as to the protective
order, the parties promptly shall present those issues to the Court in a joint letter.

Case 1:17-cv-04576-GHW-BCM Document 122 Filed 10/14/20 Page 2 of 2

2.

Request for Production No. 5
Defendants shall file their protective order motion with respect to RFP No. 5 no
later than November 12, 2020, supported by "information of sufficient particularity
and specificity to allow the Court to determine whether the discovery sought is
indeed prohibited by foreign law." Wultz v. Bank of China Ltd., 298 F.R.D. 91, 96
(S.D.N.Y. 2014) (citations omitted); see also S.E.C. v. Gibraltar Glob. Securities,
Inc., 2015 WL 1514746, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 1, 2015) ("where the alleged obstacle
to production is foreign law, the burden of proving what that law is and
demonstrating why it impedes production falls on the party resisting discovery").
Plaintiffs shall file their response no later than December 14, 2020. Defendants
shall file their reply no later than January 8, 2021. If a party requests oral argument,
they shall include that request in their respective briefing papers.

Dated: New York, New York
October 14, 2020

SO ORDERED.

________________________________
BARBARA MOSES
United States Magistrate Judge