Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-01801/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-01801-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 195
Nature of Suit: Contract Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KAREN BERNSTEIN,

Plaintiff,

v.

BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC,

Defendant.

Case No.18-cv-01801-JSC 

ORDER RE: DISCOVERY DISPUTES

1. Defendant shall make percipient witness Nancy McDonald available for deposition 

given her personal involvement in the facts of this case. Defendant’s lament about the 

cost of counsel travelling to New Jersey does not satisfy its burden to obtain a 

protective order prohibiting Plaintiff from taking Ms. McDonald’s deposition. The 

Court suggested and Plaintiff agreed to take Ms. McDonald’s deposition by video; 

however, Defendant declined. Defendant’s assertion that it is “effectively impossible 

to defend a deposition remotely” is not persuasive, especially given Defendant’s 

contention that Ms. McDonald has nothing relevant to offer and merely performed 

essentially clerical functions. 

2. Plaintiff’s request for a further 30(b)(6) deposition is DENIED. Plaintiff does not 

identify any specific material question that the witness was unable to answer. 

Plaintiff’s real complaint appears to be about the failure to produce documents sought 

in connection with the deposition. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(2), 34. It does not appear 

that Defendant served a written response to the request; if it had done so it would be 

required to state in writing if no responsive documents exist, it is producing all the 

responsive documents in its possession, custody or control, or it is withholding 

Case 3:18-cv-01801-JSC Document 51 Filed 03/25/19 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

documents. Accordingly, on or before April 2, 2019 Defendant shall (1) produce 

responsive documents to the 30(b)(6) deposition document request if any have not been 

produced, and (2) provide a written response to the deposition document request in 

accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34(b)(2).

This Order disposes of Docket No. 50.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 25, 2019

JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:18-cv-01801-JSC Document 51 Filed 03/25/19 Page 2 of 2