Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-00964/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-00964-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ERIK KNUTSON and KEVIN

LEMIEUX, Individually and on behalf

of all other similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

v.

SCHWAN’S HOME SERVICE, INC.

and CUSTOMER ELATION, INC.,

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 12cv964-GPC (DHB)

ORDER FOLLOWING

DISCOVERY CONFERENCE 

On July 22, 2013, the Court held a telephonic Discovery Conference in this matter.

Based on the discussion with counsel, and having reviewed the record, the Court HEREBY

ORDERS Defendant Schwan’s Home Service, Inc. (“Schwan’s”) to produce the

NutriSystem-only dial list of approximately 33,300 entries to Plaintiffs. 

I. BACKGROUND

This is a class action alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act,

47 U.S.C. § 227, et seq. (“TCPA”). Plaintiffs seeks to represent a class of individuals who 

received calls on their cell phones from Defendant without prior express consent. On March

25, 2013, this Court issued an Order resolving a discovery dispute between the parties. The

Court ordered, among other things, that Schwan’s was required to produce an outbound dial

list of calls Schwan’s made on behalf of itself and on behalf of NutriSystem. (ECF No. 45.) 

12cv964-GPC (DHB)

Case 3:12-cv-00964-GPC-DHB Document 92 Filed 07/23/13 Page 1 of 3
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

On April 8, 2013, Schwan’s filed a Motion to Set Aside that portion of the Order. (ECF No.

54.) Subsequently, on May 8, 2013, Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Class Certification that

significantly narrowed the class definition. (ECF No. 65.) On July 15, 2013, Judge Curiel

reversed the March 25, 2013 Order in part, and remanded the discovery dispute to this Court

for further consideration. Specifically, the Court was directed to consider whether the

ordered call list is relevant to the issue of commonality as well as determine the relative

cumulativeness and convenience of both lists. (ECF No. 87 at 15.) 

II. DISCUSSION

On July 22, 2013, the Court held a telephonic Discovery Conference. Counsel for

Schwan’s advised the Court that it has constructed a NutriSystem-only dial list that contains

approximately 33,300 entries. Schwan’s has not produced this list to Plaintiffs, but agreed

to do so if ordered by the Court. Counsel for Plaintiffs indicated that in light of the narrowed

class definition, Plaintiffs no longer seek the original 3.9 million-entry dial list. However,

Plaintiffs do seek the truncated NutriSystem-only list. Plaintiffs contend the truncated list

is relevant to commonality. Schwan’s argues that it is not. 

Upon further consideration, and in light of the narrowed class definition, the Court

finds that the truncated NutriSystem-only dial list is relevant to the issue of commonality. 

For Plaintiffs to establish commonality under Rule 23, they must show the putative class

“suffered the same injury . . . such that the . . . class claims will share common questions of

law or fact” with those of the named plaintiffs. Gen. Tel. Co. of the Southwest v. Falcon, 457

U.S. 147, 157 (1982). As Judge Curiel explained, for Plaintiffs to establish commonality in

this case, they must show “Schwan’s called Plaintiffs (1) using an automated dialer or

artificial or prerecorded voice; (2) in non-emergency situations and without prior express

consent; (3) on their cellular telephones. 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A). The common question

is thus, ‘were we all called on our cellular telephones, by an autodialer or artificial or

prerecorded voice, on behalf of Schwan’s, without having given express consent?’” (ECF

No. 87 at 12 (emphasis added).) Thus, whether the putative class members were called on

their cell phones is relevant to the question of commonality.

2 12cv964-GPC (DHB)

Case 3:12-cv-00964-GPC-DHB Document 92 Filed 07/23/13 Page 2 of 3
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

Here, Plaintiffs’ state their consultant can review the truncated NutriSystem-only list

and determine which of the approximately 33,300 calls were placed to cellular telephones. 

Therefore, the truncated list will show whether the calls Schwan’s placed to NutriSystem

customers were made to cellular telephones. Accordingly, it is relevant to the issue of

commonality and should be produced. 

Schwan’s indicated that the NutriSystem-only list contains both names and telephone

numbers. Although the Court finds the list of numbers is relevant, the names associated with

the numbers are not relevant at this time. Therefore, Schwan’s is permitted to redact the

names from the NutriSystem-only dial list that it produces to Plaintiffs. 

Further, given the narrowed class definition and availability of the NutriSystem-only

list, the Court finds the original 3.9 million-entry list would be unreasonably cumulative and

is no longer relevant at this stage in the litigation. Therefore, Schwan’s is relieved from its

obligation to produce the full 3.9 million-entry dial list. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: July 23, 2013

DAVID H. BARTICK

United States Magistrate Judge

3 12cv964-GPC (DHB)

Case 3:12-cv-00964-GPC-DHB Document 92 Filed 07/23/13 Page 3 of 3