Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00902/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-00902-63/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Account Receivable

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LIONEL HARPER, et al.,

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, LLC, 

et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:19-CV-0902-WBS-DMC

ORDER

 Plaintiffs Lionel Harper, Daniel Sinclair, Hassan Turner, Luis Vasquez, and Pedro 

Abascal, who are proceeding with retained counsel, bring this civil action pursuant to, among 

other theories, California’s Private Attorney General Act, California Labor Code § 2698, et seq. 

Plaintiffs allege violations of California statutory law with respect to the failure to pay certain 

wages. 

 On February 20, 2024, the Court issued an order addressing Plaintiffs’ motion to 

compel and motion for discovery sanctions. See ECF No. 374. Among other things, the Court 

made specific orders with respect to Plaintiff Harper’s Request for Production No. 100 (Harper 

RFP No. 100). See id. at 28. The Court directed Defendant to serve on Plaintiffs a privilege log 

related to responsive documents withheld under the attorney-client and/or attorney work produce 

privilege on or before February 23, 2024. See id. Defendant was also directed to submit to the 

Case 2:19-cv-00902-WBS-DMC Document 388 Filed 03/29/24 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 

2

Court for in camera review all documents responsive to Harper RFP No. 100. See id. The Court 

has received and reviewed the responsive documents and now issues a final order regarding 

Harper RFP No. 100. 

 Plaintiff Harper requests the following discovery from Defendant: 

RFP No. 100: All DOCUMENTS related to any communication YOU 

 had on or after September 14, 2018, with any of YOUR 

 current or former employees, officers, agents, or 

 representatives related to the preservation or collection of 

 documents or electronically stored information potentially 

 related to any of the allegations and claims in the 

 September 14, 2018, PAGA Notice and/or this lawsuit. 

 For avoidance of doubt and without limitation, this request 

 seeks all litigation hold-related communications and 

 records, and all document collection-related 

 communications and records in Charter’s possession, 

 custody, or control. Excluded from this request are any 

 communication that was sent directly to Plaintiffs or their 

 counsel. 

 Defendant responded to RFP No. 100 with the following objections: 

 Defendant objects to this Request to the extent it seeks information 

protected from discovery under the attorney–client privilege, the work 

product doctrine, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26, and/or any other 

privilege recognized under the law. Defendant will not produce such 

information. 

 Defendant objects to this Request as overly broad, unduly 

burdensome, irrelevant, immaterial, harassing, and disproportional to the 

needs of this case. This Request is particularly objectionable to the extent it 

seeks every communication with Charter employees, internally or otherwise, 

about anything that might potentially be “related” to the collection and 

preservation of documents and ESI, no matter how remote or immaterial its 

connection to the claims, defenses and allegations in this litigation. 

Defendant objects to this Request to the extent it seeks trade secrets 

or other confidential or proprietary research, development, commercial, or 

business information. 

 Defendant is withholding documents based upon its objections, 

including documents protected from disclosure by the attorney-client 

privilege and work product doctrine, all of which were created after the 

inception of this litigation.

 Following thorough in camera review of the documents at issue, the Court finds 

that the documents listed in the privilege log and submitted to this Court for in camera review fall 

under either the attorney-client or work produce privilege. Defendant’s objections are sustained. 

/ / /

/ / / 

Case 2:19-cv-00902-WBS-DMC Document 388 Filed 03/29/24 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

3

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion to compel, ECF 

No. 354, is DENIED as to Harper RFP No. 100. 

Dated: March 29, 2024

____________________________________

DENNIS M. COTA

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:19-cv-00902-WBS-DMC Document 388 Filed 03/29/24 Page 3 of 3