Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_10-cv-01372/USCOURTS-casd-3_10-cv-01372-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:101 Copyright Infringement

---

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

APPLIED PROFESSIONAL TRAINING,

INC.,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 10cv1372 DMS (MDD)

ORDER ON JOINT MOTION FOR

DETERMINATION OF DISCOVERY

DISPUTE

[DOC. NO. 58]

vs.

MIRA COSTA COLLEGE, et al.,

Defendant.

On August 4, 2011, Plaintiff filed a Joint Motion for Determination for Discovery Dispute

as required by this Court’s chambers rules. (Doc. No. 58). Counsel for the remaining defendants,

Mira Costa College is no longer in this case, did not participate in the Joint Motion but filed a

separate response on August 11, 2011. (Doc. No. 60). On August 12, 2011, this Court held a

discovery conference with counsel in chambers. The Court excused both attorneys noncompliance with chambers rules and proceeded to discuss the merits of the discovery dispute with

counsel. 

At issue are seven Requests for Production, numbered 6 through 12, propounded by the

Plaintiff upon the Defendants. The seven categories of documents requested comport with the

trade secret designations submitted by the Plaintiff to the Court and accepted as sufficient by

Magistrate Judge Louisa S. Porter. (Doc. Nos. 45, 48). Defendants object to disclosure on a

number of grounds including the belief that the Plaintiff will not comply with the Protective Order

- 1 - 10cv1372 DMS (MDD)

Case 3:10-cv-01372-DMS-MDD Document 63 Filed 08/12/11 Page 1 of 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

previously issued by Judge Porter. (Doc. Nos. 50, 51). The Court overrules that objection as

speculative. Regarding Defendants’ other objections, the one most pressed appears to be

relevance. The Court finds that the documents requested are relevant within the meaning of the

law and are clearly identified in the Plaintiff’s trade secret designations. That objection and the

remaining objections of the Defendant are overruled.

Accordingly, Defendants are required to comply with Requests for Production numbered 6

through 12 within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED:

DATED: August 12, 2011

 

 Hon. Mitchell D. Dembin

 U.S. Magistrate Judge

- 2 - 10cv1372 DMS (MDD)

Case 3:10-cv-01372-DMS-MDD Document 63 Filed 08/12/11 Page 2 of 2