Traverse Therapy Services PLLC v. Sadler-Bridges Wellness Group PLLC et al

Filing 40

ORDER granting Plaintiff's 21 Motion to Compel Initial Disclosures. The Court finds that $4,100 in attorney's fees described in Spurgeon's declaration is reasonable and order Defendants to pay Plaintiff $4,100 for the instant motion to compel and request for sanctions. Signed by Judge Marsha J. Pechman. (KRA)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

TRAVERSE THERAPY SERVICES,
PLLC,
Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 23-cv-1239 MJP
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
COMPEL

v.
SADLER-BRIDGES WELLNESS
GROUP, PLLC, JAMES BOULDINGBRIDGES, HALEY CAMPBELL,
Defendant.

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Initial Disclosures.
(Dkt. No. 21.) Having reviewed the Motion, Defendants’ Response (Dkt. No. 26), the Reply
(Dkt. No. 35), and all other relevant material, the Court GRANTS the Motion.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff seeks to compel initial disclosures from Defendants, arguing that Defendants’
initial disclosures were meaningless and did not comply with Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure. (Mot. at 4.) Plaintiff takes specific issue with Defendants’ disclosure regarding

24
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL - 1

1

documents that Defendants may use to support their claims. (Id.) Defendants’ initial disclosures

2

regarding documents consisted of the following:

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

a. Communications with Plaintiff;
b. Communications with current or former employees of Plaintiff.
(Declaration of Daniel Spurgeon, Exhibit A at 4 (Dkt. No. 22-1).)
Plaintiff argues this disclosure is deficient under Rule 26, because it does not contain a
location of the documents, a description, or the format in which the document exists. (Mot. at 4.)
Plaintiff’s counsel and Defendant’s counsel met and conferred, and Defendant agreed to
supplement the initial disclosures. (Mot. at 1; Spurgeon Decl. Ex. C (Dkt. No. 22-3).) Defendants
then missed two proposed dates to supplement the disclosures. (Mot. at 1.) Plaintiff brings this
Motion to compel the supplemental disclosures and asks for attorney’s fees in bringing the
Motion.
On November 17, 2023, two days before filing the Response brief, Defendants
supplemented the initial disclosures, providing a location where the communications are believed
to be stored and attaching certain written statements. (Reply at 2.) Defendants then filed their
Response brief arguing the initial disclosures were not deficient, and even if they were the
information has been formally supplemented so there is nothing to compel. (Response at 1-2.)
ANALYSIS
A.

Initial Disclosures
Under Rule 26(a)(1)(A)(ii), “a party must, without awaiting a discovery request, provide

to the other parties . . . a copy -or a description by category and location – of all documents,
electronically stored information, and tangible things that the disclosing party has in its
possession, custody, or control and may use to support its claims or defenses, unless the use
would be solely for impeachment.” Such initial disclosures must be made “at or within 14 days

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL - 2

1

after the parties’ Rule 26(f) conference unless a different time is set by stipulation or court order .

2

. .” Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(C). “

3

“A party must make its initial disclosures based on the information then reasonably

4

available to it.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(E). “A party is not excused from making its disclosures

5

because it has not fully investigated the case . . .” Id. Additionally, “[a] party who has made a

6

disclosure under Rule 26(a) . . . must supplement or correct its disclosure or response: (A) in a

7

timely manner if the party learns that in some material respect the disclosure or response is

8

incomplete or incorrect . . .” Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e)(1).

9

The Court agrees with Plaintiff that the initial disclosures were deficient. The two

10

categories of documents did not contain a location as required under Rule 26(a)(1)(A)(ii).

11

Defendants also supplemented the initial disclosures with various written statements not

12

previously provided.

13

In its Reply brief, Plaintiff argues that the supplemental disclosures are similarly deficient

14

because they do not contain information on the sender, receiver, e-mail addresses, phone number

15

or topic of the documents. (Reply at 3.) The Court disagrees that the supplemental disclosures

16

are similarly deficient. All Rule 26 requires is a description and location, which Defendants

17

provided. Additional information and copies of the documents may be obtained through the

18

discovery process.

19

B.

20

Attorney’s Fees
If a party fails to make a disclosure required by Rule 26(a), any other party may move to

21

compel disclosure and for appropriate sanctions.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(3)(A). Before such a

22

motion is made, the moving party must “in good faith” confer or attempt to confer with the party

23

that has failed to make the disclosure in an effort to avoid court involvement. Fed. R. Civ. P.

24
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL - 3

1

37(a)(1). If disclosure is provided after the motion was filed, the Court must require the party

2

whose conduct necessitated the motion, the party or attorney advising that conduct, or both to

3

pay the movant’s reasonable expenses, including attorney fees, unless the movant did not attempt

4

in good faith to obtain the disclosure without court action, the conduct was substantially justified,

5

or other circumstances make an award of expenses unjust. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5)(A).

6

Plaintiff is entitled to attorney’s fees. Plaintiff’s counsel attempted to confer with

7

Defendants in good faith prior to filing this Motion. (Spurgeon Decl. Ex. B (Dkt. No. 22-2).)

8

Supplemental disclosure was made after the Motion was filed, and Defendants do not even

9

attempt to explain why they missed the two deadlines to provide the supplemental disclosures.

10

Instead, Defendant forced Plaintiff to file a motion to compel, waits two days before the response

11

brief deadline to supplement the disclosures, and then argues to the Court that there is nothing to

12

compel. The Court finds this behavior is in direct violation of Rules 26 and 37.

13

Plaintiff seeks sanctions in the amount of $4,100 in attorney’s fees. (Spurgeon Decl. ¶ 4.)

14

Plaintiff’s attorney declares that his billing rate is $410 per hour, which is reasonable as an

15

attorney practicing for fourteen (14) years. (Id. at ¶¶ 4-5.) Plaintiff’s attorney also declares that

16

while he spent more than ten hours researching and drafting the meet-and-confer letter,

17

participating in telephone conferences, writing emails and drafting the briefs for this Motion, he

18

is only charging for ten hours of work. (Id. at ¶.) The Court finds that $4,100 in attorney’s fees

19

described in Spurgeon’s declaration is reasonable and order Defendants to pay Plaintiff $4,100

20

for the instant motion to compel and request for sanctions.

21

//

22

//

23

//

24
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL - 4

1

The clerk is ordered to provide copies of this order to all counsel.

2

Dated December 12, 2023.

3

A

4

Marsha J. Pechman
United States Senior District Judge

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL - 5