Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-01252/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-01252-20/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 195
Nature of Suit: Contract Product Liability
Cause of Action: 15:2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM ZABIT,

Plaintiff,

 v.

CATERPILLAR, INC., and PETERSON

POWER SYSTEMS, INC.,

Defendants.

 /

No. C 06-01252 JSW

ORDER ON JOINT DISCOVERY

DISPUTE LETTER

The Court has received and considered the parties’ Joint Discovery Dispute Letter dated

July 27, 2007. The Court has considered the parties’ positions as set forth in the letter, relevant

legal authorities, and the record in this case, and has concluded no hearing is necessary.

The Court takes no position on the “Disputes Regarding Terminology,” as there is

insufficient information before the Court to make a determination as to whether Defendants’

objections to Plaintiff’s terminology are well founded.

With respect to the “Disputes Regarding Plaintiff’s Requests for Production of

Documents/Interrogatories,” the Court takes no position on Requests for Production that are not

specifically identified in the letter brief. Plaintiff’s request that the Defendants identify the

person or persons who created “The Service Letter,” that request is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s

request that Defendants provide responses to requests for production or interrogatories

regarding warranty policies/applications for other consumers who purchased the same engines

as Plaintiff purchased is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s request for any updates to Defendants’

“Warranty Manual,” is GRANTED. Finally, Plaintiff’s request for any communications

Case 3:06-cv-01252-JSW Document 124 Filed 07/30/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

between Defendant and the Boat Manufacturer are GRANTED. Furthermore, Defendants shall

produce such information from 1998, the date the engines were manufactured, to the present.

The Court notes that this Order is intended to encompass those topics specifically

identified in the letter brief. If Defendants believe that there are specific requests for production

or interrogatories that are not covered by this Order, the parties may submit an additional letter

brief outlining any remaining disputes, by no later than August 10, 2007. The parties shall

submit the disputed requests for production, interrogatories, and the responses thereto with any

such letter brief.

As to Defendants’ request that Plaintiff produce his tax returns, that request is DENIED

WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Court will revisit this issue, if necessary, after consideration of

the parties’ motions for summary judgment.

As to Defendants’ request that Plaintiff produce information on communications

between himself and Mr. Anton, that request is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN

PART. Plaintiff shall produce any documents that were created before his attorney-client

relationship arose with Mr. Anton, and Defendant’s may depose Plaintiff on any such

communications. Any such deposition shall take place no later than August 10, 2007, unless

the parties submit a request to extend that deadline that presents good cause to do so. 

Defendant’s request to depose Mr. Anton is DENIED.

The parties shall produce documents or responses to interrogatories covered by this

Order by no later than August 10, 2007. The parties are FURTHER ADMONISHED that any

requests to alter the current briefing schedule or hearing date must be accompanied by a

showing of good cause. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 30, 2007 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-01252-JSW Document 124 Filed 07/30/07 Page 2 of 2