Composite Resources Inc v. Combat Medical Systems LLC et al
Filing
14
ORDER granting 1 Motion to Quash. Signed by Magistrate Judge David S. Cayer on 2/7/19. (tob)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:19-MC-19-MOC-DSC
COMPOSITE RESOURCES INC.,
Petitioner,
v.
COMBAT MEDICAL SYSTEMS LLC
AND ALPHAPOINTE,
Respondents,
v.
NORTH AMERICAN RESCUE
PRODUCTS LLC,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on non-party “North American Rescue Products
LLC’s Motion to Quash Subpoena …” (document #1) and the parties’ briefs and exhibits.
This Motion seeks to quash a third-party Subpoena that was served by Defendants in the
underlying patent infringement action. See Composite Resources, Inc. v. Combat Medical
Systems, LLC and Alphapointe, NCWD File No. 3:17-cv-00072-MOC-DSC. The Court is well
acquainted with the ongoing discovery disputes which the parties have been unable to resolve
absent Court intervention. Most recently, this Court conducted a telephonic discovery conference
addressing Plaintiff’s objection to producing certain documents. See docket entry dated February
1, 2019 (ordering Plaintiff to make production within fourteen days).
On December 18, 2018, Defendants served their Subpoena directing North American
Rescue Products, LLC (“NAR”) to appear for a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition and produce documents
by January 10, 2019. NAR filed this Motion to Quash.
The Court has carefully considered the parties’ arguments, the authorities, and the record.
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(d)(3)(A), the court for the district where compliance is required
must quash or modify a subpoena that:
(iii) requires disclosure of privileged or other protected matter, if no
exception or waiver applies; or
(iv) subjects a person to an undue burden.
Subsections (B) and (C) provide:
(B) To protect a person subject to or affected by a subpoena, the court for
the district where compliance is required may, on motion, quash or modify the
subpoena if it requires:
(i) disclosing a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or
commercial information; or
(ii) disclosing an unretained expert's opinion or information that does not
describe specific occurrences in dispute and results from the expert's study that was
not requested by a party.
(C) Specifying Conditions as an Alternative. In the circumstances
described in Rule 45(d)(3)(B), the court may, instead of quashing or modifying a
subpoena, order appearance or production under specified conditions if the serving
party:
(i) shows a substantial need for the testimony or material that cannot be
otherwise met without undue hardship; and
(ii) ensures that the subpoenaed person will be reasonably compensated.
Whether a subpoena subjects a witness to undue burden within the meaning of Rule
45(d)(3)(A)(iv) usually raises a question of the reasonableness of the subpoena.
The determination of a subpoena’s reasonableness requires a court to balance the
interests served by demanding compliance with the subpoena against the interests
furthered by quashing it; this process of weighing a subpoena’s benefits and
burdens calls upon the trial court to consider whether the information is necessary
and whether it is available from any other source. It obviously is a highly case
specific inquiry and entails an exercise of judicial discretion.
9A Charles Alan Wright et al, Fed. Prac. & Proc. Civ. § 2463.1 (3d ed 2005) (footnotes
omitted). “A subpoena is ‘overbroad’ if it does not limit the documents requested to subject matter
relevant to the claims or defenses.” Innovative Therapies, Inc. v. Meents, 302 F.R.D. 364 (D. Md.
2014).
Confidential commercial information is expressly protected by Rule 45. “Examples of
confidential commercial information entitled to protection under Rules 26(c)(1)(G)
and
45(d)(3)(B)(i) include customer lists and revenue information, Nutratech, Inc., v. Syntech Intern.,
Inc., 242 F.R.D. 552, 555 (N.D.Cal.2007); product design and development and marketing
strategy, Culinary Foods, Inc. v. Raychem Corp., 151 F.R.D. 297, 305 (D.Ill.1994); labor costs,
Miles v. Boeing, 154 F.R.D. 112, 114 (E.D.Pa.1994); and commercial financial information,
Vollert v. Summa Corp., 389 F.Supp. 1348, 1352 (D.Hawai'i 1975). Moreover, ‘[p]ricing and
marketing information are widely held to be confidential business information that may be subject
to a protective order.’ Uniroyal Chem. Co. Inc. v. Syngenta Crop Prot., 224 F.R.D. 53, 57 (D.Conn.
2004).
The Court concludes that this Subpoena should be quashed. Nearly all of the information
that Defendants seek is confidential commercial information. Defendants have not explained what
efforts they made to obtain this information from Plaintiff or other sources, that is, in a manner
less intrusive than issuing a subpoena for confidential information from a non-party. Defendants
attempt to meet the substantial need/undue hardship standard in Rule 45 (d)(3)(C)(i) by arguing
that NAR has engaged in misconduct as a distributor of Plaintiff’s product. Evidently Defendants
have concluded that this misconduct is not actionable in this lawsuit. Likewise, it does not support
an order compelling discovery of confidential information from a non-party. Defendants also argue
they need discovery from NAR to evaluate the testimony of other witnesses. Potential
impeachment of witnesses is an insufficient basis for Rule 45(d)(3)(C)(i) discovery here.
For those and the other reasons stated in NAR’s briefs, its “Motion to Quash Subpoena …”
(document #1) is granted. The December 18, 2019 Subpoena issued to North American Rescue
Products, LLC is quashed.
The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to counsel of record and to the Honorable
Max O. Cogburn, Jr.
SO ORDERED.
Signed: February 7, 2019
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?