Bookxchange FL LLC v. Book Runners LLC et al

Filing 12

ORDER denying without prejudice Plaintiff's 1 Motion to Compel. Plaintiff's alternative request to transfer this matter to the Northern District of Illinois for decision is DENIED as moot. Pursuant to LCR 5(g)(3), plaintiff's unopposed motion to file under seal Exhibits A through E to its reply (Dkt. # 10 ) is GRANTED. Signed by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (TH)

1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

6
7
8
9

BOOKXCHANGE FL, LLC,

10

Plaintiff,
v.

11
12

BOOK RUNNERS, LLC, et al.,

13

Defendants.

Case No. 19-CV-1099-RSL
ORDER DENYING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO
COMPEL AMAZON.COM’S
COMPLIANCE WITH
SUBPOENA

14
15

This matter comes before the Court on plaintiff’s “Motion to Compel Amazon.com Inc.’s

16 Compliance with Subpoena” (Dkt. #1) and “Stipulated Motion to File Under Seal Five Reply
17 Exhibits” (Dkt. #10). Plaintiff moves to compel Amazon.com, Inc.’s (“Amazon”) compliance
18 with a subpoena in this district under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 45(d)(2)(B)(i). The
19 underlying action is BookXchange FL, LLC v. Book Runners, LLC, et al., No. 19-CV-506 (N.D.
20 Ill.).
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Local Civil Rule (“LCR”) 37(a)(1) provides,
Any motion for an order compelling disclosure or discovery must
include a certification, in the motion or in a declaration or affidavit,
that the movant has in good faith conferred or attempted to confer
with the person or party failing to make disclosure or discovery in an
effort to resolve the dispute without court action. The certification
must list the date, manner, and participants to the conference. If the
movant fails to include such a certification, the court may deny the
motion without addressing the merits of the dispute. A good faith
effort to confer with a party or person not making a disclosure or
discovery requires a face-to-face meeting or a telephone conference.
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL - 1

1 LCR 37(a)(1). The Court, having reviewed the parties’ briefing, supporting declarations, and
2 exhibits, finds plaintiff’s motion failed to include the requisite LCR 37(a)(1) certification.
3

Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion to compel (Dkt. #1) is DENIED without prejudice. See

4 LCR 37(a)(1). Plaintiff’s alternative request to transfer this matter to the Northern District of
5 Illinois for decision is DENIED as moot. Pursuant to LCR 5(g)(3), plaintiff’s unopposed
6 motion to file under seal Exhibits A through E to its reply (Dkt. #10) is GRANTED.
7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9

DATED this 5th day of February, 2020.

10
11
12

A
Robert S. Lasnik

13
14

United States District Judge

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL - 2