ALARMAX DISTRIBUTORS, INC. v. HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL, INC.

Filing 220

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 216 Motion to Modify, Motion to Quash filed by PARA SYSTEMS, INC. Signed by Chief Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly on 8/13/18. (ard)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
ALARMAX DISTRIBUTORS, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL, INC.,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No. 14-1527
Judge David Stewart Cercone
Chief Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly
Re: ECF No. 216

ORDER
Presently before the Court is a Motion to Quash or in the alternative Modify Subpoena filed
by Para Systems, Inc. (“PSI”). ECF No. 216. PSI is not a party in this case. In response, Defendant
Honeywell International, Inc (“Honeywell”) has filed a Position Statement in support of the Motion
to Quash. ECF No. 218. On August 10, 2018, Plaintiff AlarMax Distributors, Inc. (“AlarMax”)
subsequently filed a Response to Honeywell’s Position Statement. ECF No. 219.
Upon review of the third party subpoena of PSI and the related filings, this Court finds that
substantial portions of the subpoena are violative of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 because
AlarMax seeks information that is duplicative of documentation already produced by Honeywell in
the instant case. Further, certain of AlarMax’s requests are substantially overbroad, particularly
when considered that they are directed to PSI as a nonparty. Additionally, as PSI argues, AlarMax
appears to have not limited its requests to ADI-related and AlarMax-related business and/or products
relevant to the pending litigation. The Court also considers the 2015 amendments to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 26(b)(1) as it relates to the required considerations of proportionality and access to

1

the parties to relevant information. As such, PSI’s objections will be sustained in part and overruled
in part, and the Motion to Quash will be granted in part and denied in part.
As to Subpoena Request No. 1, PSI is to produce copies of any agreements with Honeywell
or ADI relative to the purchase or sale of Electronic Fire and Security Products, other than Bates
Nos. HW2286-HW2295, Honeywell 0134752 and Bates Nos. HW2296-HW2297. The request is
otherwise denied as duplicative.
As to Subpoena Request Nos. 2 and 3, they are denied as duplicative.
As to Subpoena Request No. 4, PSI is to produce spreadsheets and/or reports as to annual
sales of Electronic Fire and Security Products to ADI. The remainder of the request is denied as
duplicative.
As to Subpoena Request No. 5, it is denied as overly broad and duplicative.
As to Subpoena Request No. 7, 1 PSI is to produce any responsive documents as to Power
Points and/or slides received from or in conjunction with any Honeywell or ADI conference, meeting
or symposium, or in conjunction with Honeywell or ADI.
As to Subpoena Request No. 8, it is denied as overly broad.
Documents that are responsive to the Subpoena at issue, as limited by this Order of Court, are
to be produced by August 30, 2018.

Dated: August 13, 2018

BY THE COURT:
/s/ Maureen P. Kelly
MAUREEN P. KELLY
CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1

Subpoena Request No. 6 has been withdrawn by AlarMax.

2