MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES COMPANY v. THE NORTH RIVER INSURANCE COMPANY et al

Filing 511

MEMORANDUM ORDER granting in part and denying in part 242 , 267 North River's Motion to Compel Mine Safety Appliances to respond properly to North River's requests for production of documents concerning MSA's products. The motion i s granted to the extent it seeks to compel MSA to produce all product catalogues in response to Request Nos. 92-95 and 97 in full, without redactions. The motion is denied in all other aspects. The report and recommendation of the Special Discovery Master 336 as augmented in the Memorandum Order is adopted in support of this ruling; FURTHER ORDERING that MSA shall abide by its representations regarding follow-up production and/or production in the original form assembled and/or collected by Ms. Karen Maston; and overruling North River's objections. Signed by Judge David S. Cercone on 9/18/12. (mwm)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES
COMPANY,
Plaintiff,
vs.
THE NORTH RIVER INSURANCE
COMPANY and RIVERSTONE
CLAIMS MANAGEMENT LLC,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

2:09cv348
Electronic Filing

MEMORANDUM ORDER
AND NOW, this 19th day of September, 2012, after de novo review of the record and upon
due consideration of [336] the Special Discovery Master's Report and Recommendation
addressing North River's Motion to Compel Mine Safety Appliances ("MSA") to respond properly
to North River’s requests for production of documents concerning MSA’s products, and the
parties' submissions in conjunction therewith, IT IS ORDERED that [242], [267] the motion be,
and the same hereby is, granted in part and denied in part. The motion is granted to the extent it
seeks to compel MSA to produce all product catalogues in response to Request Nos. 92-95 and 97
in full, without redactions. The motion is denied in all other aspects. The report and
recommendation of the Special Discovery Master as augmented herein is adopted in support of
this ruling; and
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that MSA shall abide by the representations regarding
follow-up production and/or production in the original form assembled and/or collected by Ms.
Karen Maston.

Defendant's objections are misplaced. As highlighted by MSA in its Response in
Opposition to North River's Objections (Doc. No.s 369, 390), the record contains more than
sufficient information to support the Special Discovery Master's determination that North River’s
demand that MSA produce all products-related documents without limitation in scope as to
product, time period, or custodian would cause an undue burden on MSA which far outweighs the
likely benefit of such discovery. North River has not demonstrated that the Special Discovery
Master committed clear error in ascertaining the factual underpinnings leading to this assessment.
Moreover, it is clear that continuing to pursue such open-ended requests in light of the
documents and information produced in this and the concomitant state court production seeks to
impose production obligations that would be both extensively cumulative and unduly burdensome.
Productions of the magnitude under review necessarily must take account of the technical
capacities available and the physical manpower needed to complete the undertaking. Merely
noting a few instances that lend support to the inference that the opponent may have more
responsive documents somewhere in the 80 year net cast by the initial open-ended requests does
not provide sound reason to conclude that what has been produced and/or the method by which it
has been assembled and produced is/are meaningfully deficient or strategically evasive. Such
perceived shortcomings and imperfections properly are pursued in follow-up discovery.

s/ David Stewart Cercone
David Stewart Cercone
United States District Judge

2

cc:

Brian T. Himmel, Esquire
George L. Stewart, II, Esquire
Michael H. Sampson, Esquire
Alan S. Miller, Esquire
Bridget M. Gillespie, Esquire
Dennis O. Brown, Esquire
Henry M. Sneath, Esquire
(Via CM/ECF Electronic Mail)

3