Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01324/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01324-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 470
Nature of Suit: Civil (Rico)
Cause of Action: 18:1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBIN BREWER, individually and on )

behalf of all others similarly situated, )

 )

)

)

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

SCOTT SALYER, )

)

)

)

Defendants. )

 )

1:06cv1324 AWI DLB

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ 

MOTION TO COMPEL 

(Document 32)

Plaintiff Robin Brewer (“plainitff”), individually and on behalf of all others similarly

situated filed the instant discovery motion on April 20, 2007. The matter was heard on May 25,

2007, before the Honorable Dennis L. Beck, United States Magistrate Judge. Howard Foster

appeared on behalf of Plaintiff and Brian Maschler appeared on behalf of non-party SK Foods,

L.P. (“SK Foods”) and defendant Scott Salyer (“Salyer”).

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff filed the instant RICO class action against Salyer on September 21, 2006 on

behalf of all legal U.S. citizens who worked as hourly paid employees at SK Foods during the

last four years. Plaintiff seeks back pay to compensate him for the amount he believes his wages

were depressed as a result of Salyer hiring illegal immigrants at SK Foods.

Case 1:06-cv-01324-DAD-MJS Document 37 Filed 05/30/07 Page 1 of 4
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

2

On May 17, 2007, the Honorable District Judge Anthony W. Ishii granted Salyer’s

motion to dismiss in part and ordered plaintiff to file an amended complaint within 30 days. 

Pursuant to the Scheduling Order, this case is bifurcated between issues relating to class

certification and issues relating to the merits of plaintiff’s claims. Discovery related to class

certification closed on May 4, 2007.

Plaintiff initially sought the discovery at issue in this motion from Salyer, who objected to

the requests on the grounds that he did not have possession of the documents. After conferring

with counsel, on March 15, 2007 plaintiff served a subpoena on SK Foods requesting documents

relating to the manner in which SK Foods sets its wages; the number of SK Foods skilled and

semi skilled employees; and I-9 forms of each such worker. SK Foods objected to the requests,

primarily on the grounds of privacy and burden. SK Foods also requested that discovery be

stayed pending the ruling on the motion to dismiss. Plaintiff filed the present motion on April

20, 2007. The parties also filed their joint statement on April 20, 2007.

DISCOVERY AT ISSUE

Request No. 3: All documents relating to the manner in which SK Foods

determines the wages paid to unskilled or semi-skilled employees as well

as what those wages are.

Response: SK Foods incorporates the General Objections as if fully set

forth in response to this Request. SK Foods objects to this Request on the

grounds that it seeks information that pertains to the purported “merits” of

this case, as opposed to class certification issues and this violates the Case

Management Order. SK Foods further objects to this Request on the

grounds that it is vague and ambiguous.

Request No. 6: All compilations of the number of and names of

SK Foods unskilled and semi-skilled employees, job categories,

locations and all other criteria SK Foods, LP uses to organize or

categorize them by pay grade or job description.

Response: SK Foods incorporates the General Objections as if

fully set forth in response to this Request. SK Foods objects to this

Request on the grounds that it seeks information that pertains to the

purported “merits” of this case, as opposed to class certification

issues and this violates the Case Management Order. SK Foods

further objects to this Request on the grounds that it is overly

broad, unduly burdensome and oppressive. SK Foods further

objects to this request on the grounds that it is vague and

ambiguous.

Case 1:06-cv-01324-DAD-MJS Document 37 Filed 05/30/07 Page 2 of 4
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

3

Plaintiff argues that these requests are relevant to class certification because in order to

establish commonality and predominance under FRCP 23(b)(3), plaintiff must be able to

establish that potential class members’ wages are uniformly set. Request 3 therefore seeks

documents relating to how wage levels are determined for SK Food workers. Plaintiff argues the

documents requested in Request No. 6 are essential to determining numerosity under Rule 23 and

for determining whether there is any need to seek class certification of subclasses. 

SK Foods argues that the requests go to the merits of the case rather than issues germane

to class certification and further documents that “relate to” how wages are determined or “all

compilations” could total in the thousands of pages. SK Foods therefore argues the requests are

overly burdensome. 

Request No. 11: All I-9 forms, including any support

documentation (such as copies of personal identification) for all

SK Foods, LP’S hourly paid employees.

Response: SK Foods incorporates the General Objections as if

fully set forth in response to this Request. SK Foods objects to this

Request on the grounds that it seeks information that pertains to the

purported “merits” of this case, as opposed to class certification

issues and this violates the Case Management Order. SK Foods

further objects to this Request on the grounds that it is overly

broad, unduly burdensome and oppressive and seeks private and

confidential information of non parties, thereby violating their

rights. SK Foods further objects to this request on the grounds that

it is vague and ambiguous.

Plaintiff argues that review of the I-9 forms will enable him to determine the SK Foods

employees who are not authorized to work and therefore who is a legal worker and a potential

class member. Plaintiff therefore argues the I-9 forms are relevant to issues of class certification

for purposes of establishing numerosity under Rule 23 and “manageability” under Rule 23(b)(3).

SK Foods, argues that plaintiff’s reasons are pretextual and the request seeks confidential,

private and highly sensitive personal information of non-parties.

DISCUSSION

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1) provides that a party “may obtain discovery

regarding any matter, not privileged, that is relevant to the claim or defense of any party,

including the existence, description, nature, custody, condition, and location of any books,

Case 1:06-cv-01324-DAD-MJS Document 37 Filed 05/30/07 Page 3 of 4
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

4

documents, or other tangible things and the identity and location of persons having knowledge of

any discoverable matter.” 

Request Numbers 3 and 6 seek information related to how SK Foods determines its

wages and the number of unskilled and semi-skilled employees. The requests are therefore

relevant to the class certification process in which plaintiff must establish that potential class

members’ wages are uniformly set and numerosity. Based on the clarification provided by

plaintiff at the hearing as to the breadth of the requests, the motion is granted. SK Foods shall

provide documents responsive to Request Nos. 3 and 6, including “company level documents.” 

Similarly, the I-9 forms requested in No. 11, are relevant to issues that plaintiff must

establish in the class certification process. As discussed at the hearing, SK Food’s privacy

concerns can be addressed by a stipulated protective order. The motion as to this request is

therefore also granted. 

ORDER

Based on the foregoing, plaintiff’s motion to compel non-party SK Foods to comply with

plaintiff’s subpoena issued March 15, 2007 is HEREBY GRANTED. SK Foods shall produce

documents responsive to Request Numbers 3, 6 and 11 within 20 days of the entry of a Stipulated

Protective Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: May 29, 2007 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3b142a UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-01324-DAD-MJS Document 37 Filed 05/30/07 Page 4 of 4