3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

FORT WORTH DIVISION

ROBERT (BOB) ROSS,

Plaintiff/Counterclaim

Defendant,

v.

ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONAL 

FLIGHT ATTENDANTS, et al., 

Defendants/Counterclaim

Plaintiff.

§

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

Civil Action No. 4:22-cv-343-Y 

Judge Terry R. Means

AMENDED MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF 

DOCUMENTS IN RESPONSE TO SUBPOENA ISSUED TO 

WOODS, STEPHENS AND O’NEIL, L.L.P.

COME NOW, Plaintiff, Robert “Bob” Ross (“Ross”), and file this, his Amended Motion 

to Compel Response to Subpoena Issued to Woods, Stephens, and O’Neil, L.L.P. (“Woods, 

Stephens, and O’Neil”) and in support thereof, would respectfully show this Court as follows:

1. Woods, Stephens, and O’Neil objected to the Subpoena served on October 20, 

2022, within the time period for compliance, and should be compelled to serve documents and 

all objections overruled. 

2. Counsel for Defendants served objections on behalf of Woods Stephens, and 

O’Neil to Plaintiff’s Counsel on November 3, 2022. Original Counsel for Defendants have 

subsequently withdrawn from this case and been replaced with new counsel. Defendants’ 

Counsel finally confirmed his representation of Woods, Stephens, and O’Neil on September 25, 

2023 (Appendix Pgs. 42-43). 

3. It has been a year since Woods, Stephens, and O’Neil was served with the 

Subpoena, and yet Woods, Stephens, and O’Neil will not withdraw objections, and refuses to

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 136 Filed 10/19/23 Page 1 of 4 PageID 2684
4

produce any documents responsive of Plaintiff’s Subpoena. 

4. In Compliance with the court’s meet-and-confer Order issued on September 8, 

2023, Plaintiff’s counsel reached out and spoke to Defendant’s counsel through email and via 

telephone on September 12, 2023; September 13, 2023, September 15, 2023, September 18, 2023, 

September 20, 2023, September 22, 2023, October 2, 2023, October 12, 2023, and October 15, 2023. 

Defendant’s counsel did produce documents on October 12, 2023 and October 13, 2023, 

however a substantial number of documents were withheld by Wood’s O’Neil on the basis of 

attorney-client privilege whereas no privilege log was ever produced. Furthermore, multiple

relevant documents continue to be withheld, to which Plaintiff is entitled. 

Therefore, for the reasons set forth more fully in the incorporated Brief in Support, Ross

asks that this Court grant his Motion and overrule Defendants’ and Woods, Stephens, and 

O’Neil’s objections to the Subpoena and further issue an order compelling Woods, Stephens, 

and O’Neil to produce all documents responsive to Plaintiff’s Subpoena. 

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff requests the Court set a hearing on 

the matter to hear the arguments and ultimately grant Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Production of 

Documents in Response to Subpoena to Woods, Stephens, and O’Neil L.L.P. and for such other 

relief as the Court deems proper.

THIS, the 19th day of October, 2023. 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

By: /s/ Kerri Phillips s 

Kerri Phillips, Esq.

Texas Bar No. 24065906

Phone: (972) 327-5800

Email: kerri@kdphillipslaw.com

KD PHILLIPS LAW FIRM, PLLC

6010 West Spring Creek Parkway

Plano, Texas 75024

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 136 Filed 10/19/23 Page 2 of 4 PageID 2685
5

Fax: (940) 400-0089

For Service of Filings: 

notice@kdphillipslaw.com

 

 

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(b) I hereby certify that counsel for the movant has conferred 

with Defendant in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised herein. Plaintiff’s counsel

conferred with Defendants’ counsel on via email on August 14, 2023, August 17, 2023, August 

18, 2023. A telephone call was held on August 23, 2023 wherein the concerns and objections 

were discuss, in particular Plaintiff offered to limit the time frame of the Requests for Production 

No. 1, 2 and 3 to overcome Defendants objections without success in appeasing him. Plaintiff’s 

further conferred with Defendants via email on August 25, 2023, August 26, 2023, and received 

a response on August 30, 2023 stating documents would be produced on August 31, 2023. As of 

the date of filing this Motion, Plaintiffs served extremely limited responses that were heavily 

redacted and only responsive to Request for Production 2, and no documents have been received 

from Woods, Stephens, and O’Neil. Counsel conferred on September 1, 2023 as to the relief 

requested in this Motion and Defendants’ counsel has replied they are opposed to the Motion. 

Counsel for Diversified is unopposed. 

Additionally, in compliance with the Court’s order entered on September 8 2023, 

Plaintiff’s Counsel conferred with Defendant’s counsel on September 12, 2023 via email, on a 

telephone call on September 15, 2023. I was informed Opposing counsel did not know if he 

represented Woods, Stephens O’Neil (despite declining to withdraw his objections prior to the 

original filing of this motion), so I emailed notice to Hal O’Neil, Bill Osborne, (prior counsel)

and Sandford Denison (prior counsel) on September 18, 2023 and mailed certified mail a copy of 

the pleading to Hal O’Neil. Subsequently emailed on September 20, 2023 and September 22, 

2023. On September 25, 2023, Opposing counsel confirmed his representation of Woods 

Stephens and O’Neil, LLP. Likewise, Plaintiff’s Counsel emailed Defendants’ Counsel on 

October 2, 2023, October 12, 2023 October 15, 2023. Defendants’ counsel served very limited

and heavily redacted documents, and opposes this motion. Plaintiff maintains that no attorney 

client privilege can be maintained between counsel for Defendant and Woods, Stephens, and 

O’Neil prior to the filing of this matter and therefore asks the court to compel discovery. 

As of October 19, 2023, Defendant’s counsel did send a final email with minimal 

documents—still redacted, just before Plaintiff’s deadline to amend this pleading, however all of 

Plaintiff’s original issues continue to persist. (See Appendix pp. 68-75). 

THIS, the 19th day of October, 2023. 

By: /s/ Kerri Phillips 

Kerri Phillips, Esq.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 136 Filed 10/19/23 Page 3 of 4 PageID 2686
6

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF 

MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS IN RESPONSE TO 

SUBPOENA ISSUED TO WOODS, STEPHENS, O’NEIL, L.L.P. has been served in accordance

with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to all counsel of record identified below on this 19th day of 

October, 2023. 

 

By: /s/ Kerri Phillips s 

Kerri Phillips, Esq.

Jeffrey Bartos

Guerrieri, Bartos, & Roma, P.C. 

1900 M Street, NW, Suite 700

Washington, DC 20036

Tel: (202) 624-7400; Fax: (202) 624-7420 

Email: jbartos@geclaw.com

Charlette Matts

In-House Counsel for APFA

1004 West Euless Blvd

Euless, TX 76040

Tel: (682) 301-8454 

Cmatts@apfa.org

James Sanford

4803 Gaston Avenue

Dallas, TX 75249-1020 

Tel: (214) 800-5111; Fax: (214) 838-

0001 

Email jim@gillespiesanford.com

Email: joe@gillespiesanford.com

Michael Rake

PO Box 1556 

Lake Dallas, TX 75065-1556 

Tel: (940) 498-2103 Fax: (940) 498-2103 

Email: mrake1@mrakeattorney.com

Case 4:22-cv-00343-Y Document 136 Filed 10/19/23 Page 4 of 4 PageID 2687