WILMINGTON, Del. — A federal judge in Delaware on Nov. 19 ruled that the defendant in a trade secret misappropriation lawsuit failed to show that a semiconductor developer and manufacturer engaged in any spoliation of evidence sufficient to lead to dismissal of the action (Monolithic Power Systems Inc. v. Intersil Corp., No. 16-1125, D. Del., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 201797).
BATON ROUGE, La. — A Louisiana federal magistrate judge on Dec. 6 granted insureds and their insurer’s joint motion for entry or a protective order that governs the exchange of confidential information during discovery in a breach of contract and bad faith dispute arising from commercial property damage allegedly caused by a wind event (Mr. And Mrs. John W. Weimar v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, No. 17-584, M.D. La.).
SEATTLE — Claiming that two defendant firearm rights organizations have violated a Washington federal court’s injunction against the dissemination of 3D-printable gun plans, a group of U.S. states in a Dec. 4 motion asks the court to compel the groups to respond to discovery requests aimed at uncovering the defendants’ post-injunction actions (Washington, et al. v. U.S. Department of State, et al., No. 2:18-cv-01115, W.D. Wash.).
SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge in California on Nov. 21 ordered Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc. to provide discovery related to employees that could be members of a putative class alleging employment discrimination (Adriana Guzman, et al. v. Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc., et al., No. 17-2606, N.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 198933).
ATLANTA — In a Nov. 23 reply brief supporting their motion for limited relief from existing discovery stay, the plaintiffs in a consolidated class action over the 2017 data breach experienced by Equifax Inc. tell a Georgia federal court that certain requested documents and employee depositions are necessary to preserve evidence and to facilitate upcoming full discovery (In Re: Equifax Inc., Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, No. 1:17-md-2800, N.D. Ga.).
AUSTIN, Texas — A Texas federal judge on Nov. 30 found that an insured’s liquidating agent did not waive its attorney-client privilege in a discovery dispute, denying the insurer’s motion to compel production of documents related to the agent’s knowledge and intent concerning its notice of rescission of a fidelity bond (Southwest Marine and General Insurance Company v. National Credit Union Administration Board, No. 17-00367, W.D. Texas, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 203684).
NEW YORK — A New York federal judge on Nov. 30 granted a petition filed by the Republic of Kazakhstan for an order allowing it to seek discovery materials from a money management company for use in several foreign proceedings in which investors are attempting to enforce a $199 million arbitral award (In re Application of Republic of Kazakhstan, No. 18-543, S.D. N.Y.).
ORLANDO, Fla. — An attorney representing dissatisfied timeshare owners must produce certain client information to a group of timeshare operators suing him for tortious interference, a Florida federal judge ruled Dec. 4, finding that the withheld discovery materials were not privileged and that any objections to producing them were waived (Westgate Resorts Ltd. Inc. v. Mitchell Reed Sussman, et al., No. 6:17-cv-01467, M.D. Fla., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 204609).
NEW YORK — A federal judge in New York on Nov. 29 ordered Chevron Corp. and Steven Donziger, the attorney who won an $18.5 billion judgment against Chevron in a court in Ecuador for injuries only to have it reversed, to appear in district court for conference on what is called a forensic protocol in an effort to resolve discovery disputes between the parties (Chevron Corporation v. Steven Donziger, No. 11-691, S.D. N.Y.).
CHICAGO — In its Nov. 28 response to a plaintiff’s motion to compel production of identifying information for prospective class members in a data breach lawsuit, Barnes & Noble Inc. tells an Illinois federal court that it properly redacted private customer information that is irrelevant at the class definition stage of the litigation (In re Barnes & Noble Pin Pad Litigation, No. 1:12-cv-08617, N.D. Ill.).
SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal magistrate judge on Nov. 27 signed a stipulated protective order regarding disclosure and discovery in an insured’s lawsuit arising from flood damage (Alicia Martin v. CSAA Insurance Exchange, et al., No. 17-04066, N.D. Calif.).
SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge in California on Nov. 26 declined to compel the production of the terms of a confidential settlement between the plaintiff and co-defendant Facebook Inc. in a trade secrets misappropriation lawsuit, ruling that the other co-defendants are not entitled to an offset of lost profits and unjust enrichment damages (BladeRoom Group Limited, et al. v. Emerson Electric Co., et al., No. 15-1370, N.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 199738).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC) does not have to turn over a solicitor’s letter to an Indian tribe in its battle to conduct casino gaming on its land based on the attorney-client privilege, but 39 other documents submitted by the tribe can be added to the agency’s administrative record in its denial of gaming, a District of Columbia federal judge held Nov. 28 (Fort Sill Apache Tribe v. National Indian Gaming Commission, et al., No. 14-958, D. D.C., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 201089).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Characterizing an adult entertainment company as a serial litigator, a District of Columbia federal judge on Nov. 16 denied the plaintiff’s motion to conduct pre-conference discovery to learn the identity of a John Doe defendant in a copyright infringement case, chiding the plaintiff for treating the court like “an ATM” in its “high-tech shakedown” (Strike 3 Holdings LLC v. John Doe, No. 1:18-cv-01425, D. D.C., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 195580).
TACOMA, Wash. — A company that sells apps and Bluetooth-enabled products for home food preparation was ordered to provide the source code for its products on Nov. 26, with a Washington federal judge deeming the code relevant to patent infringement claims brought by a rival company in granting in part a motion to compel (Perfect Co. v. Adaptics Limited, No. 3:14-cv-05976, W.D. Wash., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 199728).
MIAMI — A Florida appeals panel on Nov. 21 found that an insureds’ expert’s mid-trial inspection of their property damage violated a trial court’s discovery orders, reversing and remanding a lower court’s $100,000 judgment in favor of the insureds in a breach of contract lawsuit against their insurer (Citizens Property Insurance Corporation v. Ricardo Gilart Vazquez, et al., No. 3D15-2864, Fla. App., 3rd Dist., 2018 Fla. App. LEXIS 16576).
FRESNO, Calif. — A federal magistrate judge in California deferred ruling on a third-party claimant’s motion to compel further responses to two discovery requests in an insurance breach of contract and bad faith lawsuit, ruling that although the discovery requests are relevant, not overly broad, vague and ambiguous and not subject to either attorney-client privilege or privacy under California law, an insurer should be allowed to supplement the record with evidence showing that the two interrogatories are burdensome (Jennifer M. Tucker v. AMCO Insurance Co., No. 17-1761, E.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 197140).
ALBANY, N.Y. — A federal judge in New York on Nov. 19 denied a motion by the 3M Co. to stay a groundwater contamination lawsuit but granted the company’s alternative request to postpone certain depositions until the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPMDL) rules on its motion to transfer the cases to a federal court overseeing an MDL for similar lawsuits (Kenneth Wickenden, et al. v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp., et al., No. 17-1056, N.D. N.Y.).
ERIE, Pa. — A Pennsylvania federal judge on Nov. 20 denied an insured’s motion for an interim funding order in an asbestos coverage dispute but ordered the parties to participate in a period of expedited discovery regarding the exhaustion of the insured’s primary policies and the potential coverage obligations of an excess insurer (Zurn Industries LLC v. Allstate Insurance Co., et al., No. 18-299, W.D. Pa., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 197481).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a Nov. 16 miscellaneous order, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to the federal government in its quest to prevent extra-record discovery in a suit over the planned to collect citizenship data in the upcoming census, with the focus on a trial court’s decision to permit a group of states, which objected to the plan, to depose the secretary of Commerce regarding his mental processes in reaching the decision (In re U.S. Department of Commerce, No. 18-557, U.S. Sup., 2018 U.S. LEXIS 6777).