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

DEFENDANT’S AMENDED RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS

TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

CASE NO. 5:17-CV-00603-EJD

PATTERSON BELKNAP WEBB & TYLER LLP

Steven A. Zalesin (pro hac vice)

Michelle W. Cohen (pro hac vice)

1133 Avenue of the Americas

New York, NY 10036-6710

Telephone: (212) 336-2000

Facsimile: (212) 336-2222

SHOOK HARDY & BACON LLP

Tammy B. Webb

One Montgomery Tower, Suite 2700

San Francisco, CA 94104

Telephone: 415-544-1904

Facsimile: 415-391-0281

tbwebb@shb.com

Attorneys For Defendant

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JACKIE FITZHENRY-RUSSELL,

Plaintiff,

v.

THE COCA-COLA COMPANY,

Defendant.

Case No. 5:17-CV-00603-EJD

DEFENDANT’S AMENDED

RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO

PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF

INTERROGATORIES

Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26 and 33, Defendant The CocaCola Company (“Coca-Cola”) hereby responds and/or objects to Plaintiff Jackie FitzhenryRussell’s First Set of Interrogatories (“Interrogatories”) as follows:

COCA-COLA’S DEFINITIONS

1. “Pack Type” means a variety of disposable containers (e.g., a 2-liter

bottle) or outer packaging (e.g., a 12-pack carton) in which a product is packaged for retail sale,

excluding any containers or outer packaging in which the product is packaged for wholesale or

fountain distribution.

2. “Product” means the soft drink Seagram’s® Ginger Ale.

Case 5:17-cv-00603-EJD Document 59-3 Filed 02/06/18 Page 1 of 18
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

DEFENDANT’S AMENDED RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS

TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

CASE NO. 5:17-CV-00603-EJD

10128005v.3

GENERAL OBJECTIONS

Coca-Cola incorporates each of the General Objections below into its specific

objections to each Interrogatory, whether or not each such General Objection is expressly

referred to in Coca-Cola’s objections to a specific Interrogatory. Coca-Cola reserves the right to

supplement, amend, modify, or correct its responses and objections under Rule 26(e) should it

discover additional information or grounds for objections at any time prior to the conclusion of

this action. The following responses and objections are based upon information known at this

time.

1. Coca-Cola objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they purport to

impose obligations on Coca-Cola that exceed the requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure, the Local Rules, and any other relevant rules of practice. Coca-Cola will respond in

accordance with its obligations under the applicable rules, and will provide only such answers as

can be determined in the exercise of reasonable diligence.

2. Coca-Cola objects to the Interrogatories as harassing to the extent they are

duplicative of one another and other discovery, and to the extent they seek information outside of

the scope of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Local Rules, and any other relevant rules

of practice, including Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1).

3. The only Product at issue in this lawsuit is Seagram’s® Ginger Ale.

Coca-Cola objects to all Interrogatories seeking information about other products as not relevant,

not proportional to the needs of this case, and excessively burdensome in comparison to any

theoretical benefit.

4. Coca-Cola objects to the Interrogatories to the extent any individual

Interrogatory is vague, ambiguous, unintelligible, indefinite, or confusing and therefore not

susceptible to a clear and definitive response.

5. Coca-Cola objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they are duplicative

of other Interrogatories specifically and of other discovery requests generally.

Case 5:17-cv-00603-EJD Document 59-3 Filed 02/06/18 Page 2 of 18
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

DEFENDANT’S AMENDED RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS

TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

CASE NO. 5:17-CV-00603-EJD

10128005v.3

6. Coca-Cola objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they seek

information that is obtainable from publicly available sources and therefore equally available to

both parties.

7. Coca-Cola objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they seek

information not in the possession, custody, or control of Coca-Cola. Coca-Cola will respond to

these Interrogatories with information that is known by Coca-Cola or discoverable in the

exercise of reasonable diligence.

8. Coca-Cola objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they seek

information subject to third-party confidentiality agreements or subject to confidentiality

pursuant to court order.

9. Coca-Cola objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they call for

trade secrets, confidential business information or other confidential information. Coca-Cola

will produce information in response to the Interrogatories pursuant to the September 6, 2017

Protective Order (Dkt. No. 44).

10. Coca-Cola objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they purport to

impose any obligation on agents, investigators or other third parties to gather or communicate

information.

11. Coca-Cola objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they seek

information concerning products, labeling, advertising, marketing, and/or other promotional

statements which Plaintiff did not purchase and/or see, and/or upon which Plaintiff did not rely.

12. Coca-Cola objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they seek

information or communications protected by the attorney-client privilege, work-product

immunity, or any other applicable privilege or immunity.

13. Coca-Cola objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they call for a

legal conclusion or purport to require Coca-Cola to form, set forth, or perform a legal analysis.

14. Coca-Cola objects to the Interrogatories as overbroad, unduly

Case 5:17-cv-00603-EJD Document 59-3 Filed 02/06/18 Page 3 of 18
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

4

DEFENDANT’S AMENDED RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS

TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

CASE NO. 5:17-CV-00603-EJD

10128005v.3

burdensome, and not proportional to the needs of the case to the extent they seek information

without any temporal limitation or outside the Class Period. Unless otherwise noted, CocaCola’s responses are limited to the period December 28, 2012 through December 28, 2016.

15. Coca-Cola objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they are harassing,

vague, ambiguous, overbroad or unduly burdensome, lack reasonable particularity, seek

irrelevant information or are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible

evidence, and are not proportional to the needs of the case. For example, and without limitation,

Coca-Cola objects to the Interrogatories as overbroad and unduly burdensome to the extent they

seek the production of “all” or “any” category of information that refers or relates to a particular

subject.

16. Coca-Cola objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they call for an

interpretation on the part of Coca-Cola. In order to provide a response in good faith, Coca-Cola

has made interpretations where necessary and has responded accordingly.

17. Coca-Cola objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they are not

proportional to the needs of this case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1).

18. Coca-Cola objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they exceed 25 in

number, accounting for discrete subparts. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(a)(1).

19. Coca-Cola will construe each Interrogatory only to require it to use

reasonable diligence under the circumstances in responding.

20. Coca-Cola’s responses to the Interrogatories shall in no way constitute or

be construed as a waiver of any of the objections contained herein, or of any other objection

regarding the relevance, materiality, privilege, or admissibility of any such information as

evidence in this suit or any other proceeding, action, or trial.

21. Coca-Cola’s responses are based upon information presently known to it.

Coca-Cola reserves the right to rely on any facts, documents, or other evidence which may

develop or subsequently come to its attention, to assert additional objections, and to supplement

Case 5:17-cv-00603-EJD Document 59-3 Filed 02/06/18 Page 4 of 18
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

5

DEFENDANT’S AMENDED RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS

TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

CASE NO. 5:17-CV-00603-EJD

10128005v.3

these responses.

All individual responses to the Interrogatories are made on the express reservation

of all applicable previous objections, court rulings, agreements and understandings limiting the

Interrogatories and are made pursuant to the foregoing general objections and any specific

objections set forth below.

OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF’S DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

1. Coca-Cola objects to the definition of “ANY,” “ALL,” and “EACH” as

unintelligible. Coca-Cola will construe these terms in good faith and in accordance with their

plain meaning.

2. Coca-Cola objects to the definition of “CLASS PERIOD” as overbroad.

Unless otherwise noted, Coca-Cola’s responses are limited to the period December 28, 2012

through December 28, 2016.

3. Coca-Cola objects to the definition of “COMMUNICATION” as vague

and overbroad. Coca-Cola will construe this term in good faith and in accordance with its plain

meaning.

4. Coca-Cola objects to the definition of “CUSTOMER” as overbroad,

unduly burdensome, and disproportionate to the needs of the case, to the extent it encompasses

persons and/or entities who are not members of the putative Class, and of whom Coca-Cola has

no knowledge.

5. Coca-Cola objects to the definition of “DOCUMENT” as overbroad,

unduly burdensome, and not proportional to the needs of the case to the extent it purports to

impose obligations on Coca-Cola that are inconsistent with or exceed the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure, the Local Rules, or any other relevant rules of practice.

6. Coca-Cola objects to the definition of “FLAVOR SUPPLIER” as

overbroad, unduly burdensome, and disproportionate to the needs of the case, to the extent it

encompasses persons and/or entities of whom Coca-Cola has no knowledge.

Case 5:17-cv-00603-EJD Document 59-3 Filed 02/06/18 Page 5 of 18
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

6

DEFENDANT’S AMENDED RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS

TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

CASE NO. 5:17-CV-00603-EJD

10128005v.3

7. Coca-Cola objects to the definition of “GINGER ALE” as overbroad,

unduly burdensome, and disproportionate to the needs of the case, to the extent it encompasses

information about products that were not purchased and/or seen by Plaintiff, are not

manufactured or distributed by Coca-Cola, and/or are outside of Coca-Cola’s custody and

control.

8. Coca-Cola objects to the definition of “INCLUDE,” “INCLUDES,” and

“INCLUDING” as vague, ambiguous, and confusing. Coca-Cola will in good faith construe the

words “INCLUDE,” “INCLUDES,” and “INCLUDING” in the Interrogatories to mean that any

modifiers that succeed these terms are offered as non-exhaustive illustrations.

9. Coca-Cola objects to the definition of “MARKET,” “MARKETED,”

“MARKETING,” and “MARKETING MATERIALS” as vague, overbroad and unduly

burdensome, as it includes advertisements and other documents that are not mentioned in the

Complaint and that Plaintiff did not see, and/or upon which Plaintiff did not rely.

10. Coca-Cola objects to the definition of “REPORTS” as vague and

overbroad to the extent it includes “informal” investigations, studies, research, assessments,

analyses, reviews, or audits, focus groups, analyses, or assessments without clarification or

limitation.

11. Coca-Cola objects to the definition of “YOU” or “YOUR” as overbroad,

unduly burdensome, not proportional to the needs of the case, and inconsistent with the Federal

Rules of Civil Procedure. Coca-Cola’s responses will be limited to the named Defendant only.

12. Coca-Cola objects to Instructions Nos. 19–25 as purporting to impose

obligations on Coca-Cola that exceed the requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,

the Local Rules, and any other relevant rules of practice. To the extent Coca-Cola responds to

the Interrogatories, it will provide only such responses as are determinable and verifiable through

the exercise of reasonable diligence.

13. Coca-Cola objects to the demand for a privilege log as purporting to

Case 5:17-cv-00603-EJD Document 59-3 Filed 02/06/18 Page 6 of 18
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

7

DEFENDANT’S AMENDED RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS

TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

CASE NO. 5:17-CV-00603-EJD

10128005v.3

impose obligations on Coca-Cola that exceed the requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure, the Local Rules, and any other relevant rules of practice.

SPECIFIC RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF’S INTERROGATORIES

INTERROGATORY NO. 1: Provide ALL UPC code and SKU numbers associated with

EACH SEAGRAM’S GINGER ALE sold in the United States during the CLASS PERIOD.

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 1: In addition to the foregoing general

objections, Coca-Cola objects to this Interrogatory as duplicative of other discovery

requests generally, including Plaintiff’s First Request for the Production of Documents.

Coca-Cola further objects to this Interrogatory as the phrase “associated with” is vague

and ambiguous. Coca-Cola further objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks

information that otherwise does not exist in the ordinary course of business.

Notwithstanding and without waiving the foregoing objections, Coca-Cola will identify

the UPC codes for each Pack Type of the Product sold in the United States during the

Class Period, to the extent that information can be determined in the exercise of

reasonable diligence.

INTERROGATORY NO. 2: Identify ALL FLAVOR SUPPLIERS that made flavorings

or “natural flavors” used to make ANY of the SEAGRAM’S GINGER ALES sold during

the CLASS PERIOD.

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 2: In addition to the foregoing general

objections, Coca-Cola objects to this Interrogatory as duplicative of Interrogatory No. 8

specifically and other discovery requests generally, including Plaintiff’s First Request for

the Production of Documents. Coca-Cola further objects to the phrase “flavorings or

‘natural flavors’” as vague and ambiguous. Coca-Cola further objects to this

Interrogatory as overbroad, unduly burdensome, and not proportional to the needs of the

case, to the extent it seeks information about ingredients unrelated to the labeling claim at

issue. In accordance with Plaintiff’s clarification in her November 9, 2017 letter to CocaCola that she is “asking for the identity of the FLAVOR SUPPLIERS that provide the

Case 5:17-cv-00603-EJD Document 59-3 Filed 02/06/18 Page 7 of 18
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

8

DEFENDANT’S AMENDED RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS

TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

CASE NO. 5:17-CV-00603-EJD

10128005v.3

compound(s) used to provide the ginger flavor in SEAGRAM’S GINGER ALE,” CocaCola will identify business partners it engaged in developing the flavoring for the Product

during the Class Period, to the extent that information can be determined in the exercise

of reasonable diligence.

INTERROGATORY NO. 3: Identify, by Bates Nos., ALL product labels, boxes, and/or

packages in use during the CLASS PERIOD for EACH variety of SEAGRAM’S GINGER

ALES. If more than one was used, state the dates on which EACH product label, box,

and/or package was, or will be, introduced to and/or removed from SEAGRAM’S

GINGER ALES in the market.

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 3: In addition to the foregoing general

objections, Coca-Cola objects to this Interrogatory as irrelevant, overbroad, unduly

burdensome, and neither proportional to the needs of the case, nor relevant to any claim

or defense in this Action, to the extent it seeks packaging and labels neither seen nor

relied upon by Plaintiff, including hypothetical prospective future packaging and labels

and labels that have not been used in retail sale. Coca-Cola further objects to this

Interrogatory as the phrase “product labels, boxes, and/or packages in use” is vague and

ambiguous. Coca-Cola further objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks

information that otherwise does not exist in the ordinary course of business, as Coca-Cola

does not maintain records of when its labels are in circulation and has no means of

controlling the distribution channels for particular product labels after they leave CocaCola’s possession. Notwithstanding and without waiving the foregoing objections, CocaCola will identify the Bates numbers that correspond to the packaging and labels for the

Product during the Class Period that could be located after a reasonable search, and the

dates those labels were generated, to the extent that information can be determined in the

exercise of reasonable diligence.

INTERROGATORY NO. 4: Identify ALL products (INCLUDING, the types of

products, brands, and sub-brands) that YOU contend compete with SEAGRAM’S

GINGER ALES in the market.

Case 5:17-cv-00603-EJD Document 59-3 Filed 02/06/18 Page 8 of 18
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

9

DEFENDANT’S AMENDED RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS

TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

CASE NO. 5:17-CV-00603-EJD

10128005v.3

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 4: In addition to the foregoing general

objections, Coca-Cola objects to this Interrogatory as overbroad, unduly burdensome, and

neither proportional to the needs of the case, nor relevant to any claim or defense in this

Action, to the extent it seeks Coca-Cola’s subjective opinions not relied upon by Plaintiff.

Coca-Cola further objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information

obtainable from publicly available sources and therefore equally available to both parties,

as Plaintiff acknowledged in her November 9, 2017 letter to Coca-Cola. Coca-Cola

further objects to this Interrogatory as the word “sub-brands” and the phrase “in the

market” are vague and ambiguous. Notwithstanding and without waiving the foregoing

objections, Coca-Cola will identify ginger ale products that it contends competed with

Seagram’s® Ginger Ale during the Class Period, to the extent that information can be

determined in the exercise of reasonable diligence.

INTERROGATORY NO. 5: Identify ALL factors that YOU contend are material to the

consumer demand for SEAGRAM’S GINGER ALES and/or consumers’ decision to

PURCHASE SEAGRAM’S GINGER ALES.

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 5: In addition to the foregoing general

objections, Coca-Cola further objects to this Interrogatory as overbroad, unduly

burdensome, and neither proportional to the needs of the case, nor relevant to any claim

or defense in this Action, to the extent it seeks Coca-Cola’s subjective opinions not relied

upon by Plaintiff. Coca-Cola further objects to this Interrogatory as the phrase “material

to the consumer demand for SEAGRAM’S GINGER ALES” is vague and ambiguous,

and to the extent it calls for a legal conclusion. Coca-Cola further objects to this

Interrogatory as duplicative of Interrogatory No. 6 specifically and other discovery

requests generally. Coca-Cola further objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks

information that is protected by the attorney-client privilege, work-product immunity, or

any other applicable privilege or immunity. Notwithstanding and without waiving the

foregoing objections, Coca-Cola will identify final non-privileged market research,

Case 5:17-cv-00603-EJD Document 59-3 Filed 02/06/18 Page 9 of 18
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

10

DEFENDANT’S AMENDED RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS

TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

CASE NO. 5:17-CV-00603-EJD

10128005v.3

consumer studies and reports that relate to consumers’ preference during the Class Period

for ginger ale beverages marketed as “MADE WITH REAL GINGER” and/or variants

thereon, to the extent that information can be determined in the exercise of reasonable

diligence.

INTERROGATORY NO. 6: Identify ALL factors that YOU contend are material to the

consumer demand for GINGER ALES and/or consumers’ decision to PURCHASE

GINGER ALES.

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 6: In addition to the foregoing general

objections, Coca-Cola further objects to this Interrogatory as overbroad, unduly

burdensome, and neither proportional to the needs of the case, nor relevant to any claim

or defense in this Action, to the extent it seeks Coca-Cola’s subjective opinions not relied

upon by Plaintiff, and to the extent it is not limited to the labeling claim at issue. CocaCola further objects to this Interrogatory as the phrase “material to the consumer demand

for GINGER ALES” is vague and ambiguous, and to the extent it calls for a legal

conclusion. Coca-Cola further objects to this Interrogatory as duplicative of

Interrogatory No. 5 specifically and other discovery requests generally. Coca-Cola

further objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information that is protected by

the attorney-client privilege, work-product immunity, or any other applicable privilege or

immunity. Notwithstanding and without waiving the foregoing objections, Coca-Cola

will identify final non-privileged market research, consumer studies and reports that

relate to consumers’ preference during the Class Period for ginger ale beverages

marketed as “MADE WITH REAL GINGER” and/or variants thereon, to the extent that

information can be determined in the exercise of reasonable diligence.

INTERROGATORY NO. 7: For EACH year in the CLASS PERIOD, state the total

number of units of EACH variety of SEAGRAM’S GINGER ALE (e.g., Seagram’s Ginger

Ale and Seagram’s Diet Ginger Ale) sold in EACH state in the United States and the

revenue obtained for the same.

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 7: In addition to the foregoing general

Case 5:17-cv-00603-EJD Document 59-3 Filed 02/06/18 Page 10 of 18
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

11

DEFENDANT’S AMENDED RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS

TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

CASE NO. 5:17-CV-00603-EJD

10128005v.3

objections, Coca-Cola objects to this Interrogatory as duplicative of other discovery

requests generally, including Plaintiff’s First Request for the Production of Documents.

Coca-Cola further objects to the term “variety” as vague and ambiguous. Coca-Cola

further objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information that is not in CocaCola’s possession, custody, or control. Notwithstanding and without waiving the

foregoing objections, Coca-Cola will identify the number of units of each Pack Type of

Seagram’s® Ginger Ale sold in the United States during the Class Period, to the extent

that information can be determined in the exercise of reasonable diligence.

INTERROGATORY NO. 8: For EACH lot number of SEAGRAM’S GINGER ALES

sold during the CLASS PERIOD, state the bottler and flavor supplier for EACH and the

variety (e.g., Seagram’s Ginger Ale and Seagram’s Diet Ginger Ale) of SEAGRAM’S

GINGER ALES in the lot.

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 8: In addition to the foregoing general

objections, Coca-Cola objects to this Interrogatory as vague and unintelligble, and as the

terms “variety” and “lot number” are vague and ambiguous. Coca-Cola further objects to

this Interrogatory as duplicative of Interrogatory No. 2 specifically and other discovery

requests generally, including Plaintiff’s First Request for the Production of Documents.

Coca-Cola further objects to this Interrogatory as overbroad, unduly burdensome, not

proportional to the needs of the case, and not relevant to any claim or defense to the

extent it seeks information about ingredients unrelated to the labeling claim at issue.

Coca-Cola further objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information that is

protected by the attorney-client privilege, work-product immunity, or any other

applicable privilege or immunity. Coca-Cola further objects to this Interrogatory to the

extent it seeks information that otherwise does not exist in the ordinary course of

business, as Coca-Cola does not employ “lot” numbers, nor does it maintain bottler/flavor

supplier information for each unit of each Pack Type sold. Notwithstanding and without

waiving the foregoing objections, Coca-Cola will identify business partners it engaged in

Case 5:17-cv-00603-EJD Document 59-3 Filed 02/06/18 Page 11 of 18
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

12

DEFENDANT’S AMENDED RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS

TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

CASE NO. 5:17-CV-00603-EJD

10128005v.3

developing the flavoring for and bottling the Product during the Class Period, to the

extent that information can be determined in the exercise of reasonable diligence.

INTERROGATORY NO. 9: If YOU contend that YOU have made ANY changes to the

SEAGRAM’S GINGER ALES’ flavoring, ingredients, or the way that such ingredients are

combined or assembled, that RELATE TO the claim that the SEAGRAM’S GINGER

ALES are “MADE WITH REAL GINGER,” identify ANY such change(s), INCLUDING,

when the change(s) occurred and the reason(s) for the change(s).

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 9: In addition to the foregoing general

objections, Coca-Cola objects to this Interrogatory as vague and unintelligible. CocaCola further objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information that is

protected by the attorney-client privilege, work-product immunity, or any other

applicable privilege or immunity. Notwithstanding and without waiving the foregoing

objections, Coca-Cola will identify any changes to the ingredients for flavoring the

Product during the Class Period that relate to the claim that the Product is “MADE WITH

REAL GINGER,” to the extent that information can be determined in the exercise of

reasonable diligence.

INTERROGATORY NO. 10: Identify (by full name, the present or last known residence

address and business address and telephone numbers) ALL of YOUR current and former

employees, officers, owners and/or agents, who have or had, as part of their job duties,

ANY responsibility for substantiating the claims made on the packaging of the

SEAGRAM’S GINGER ALES or in marketing materials RELATED TO SEAGRAM’S

GINGER ALES, and describe those responsibilities for EACH PERSON.

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 10: In addition to the foregoing general

objections, Coca-Cola objects to this Interrogatory as overbroad, unduly burdensome, and

neither proportional to the needs of the case, nor relevant to any claim or defense in this

Action, to the extent this Interrogatory seeks information about “marketing materials” not

relied upon by Plaintiff. Coca-Cola further objects to the Interrogatory as irrelevant,

overbroad, and unduly burdensome to the extent it seeks personal information related to

“ALL” employees with “ANY” responsibility for substantiating claims that appear on the

Product, and to the extent it is not limited to the labeling claim at issue. Coca-Cola

Case 5:17-cv-00603-EJD Document 59-3 Filed 02/06/18 Page 12 of 18
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

13

DEFENDANT’S AMENDED RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS

TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

CASE NO. 5:17-CV-00603-EJD

10128005v.3

further objects to this Interrogatory as the phrase “responsibility for substantiating the

claims” is vague and ambiguous. Coca-Cola further objects to this Interrogatory to the

extent it seeks information that is protected by the attorney-client privilege, work-product

immunity, or any other applicable privilege or immunity. Notwithstanding and without

waiving the foregoing objections, Coca-Cola will identify a person or persons with

knowledge of or experience with substantiation for the statement that Seagram’s® Ginger

Ale is “MADE WITH REAL GINGER” during the Class Period, to the extent that

information can be determined in the exercise of reasonable diligence.

INTERROGATORY NO. 11: Identify the methodology by which DEFENDANT tested,

analyzed, or evaluated whether the SEAGRAM’S GINGER ALES are “MADE WITH

REAL GINGER,” INCLUDING the laboratories, facilities, or institutions where the

SEAGRAM’S GINGER ALES and/or the flavorings used were researched, developed, and

tested and the REPORTS produced.

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 11: In addition to the foregoing general

objections, Coca-Cola objects to this Interrogatory as vague and unintelligible. CocaCola further objects to this Interrogatory as duplicative of other discovery requests

generally, including Plaintiff’s First Request for the Production of Documents. CocaCola further objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information that is

protected by the attorney-client privilege, work-product immunity, or any other

applicable privilege or immunity. Notwithstanding and without waiving the foregoing

objections, Coca-Cola will identify business partners it engaged in developing the

flavoring for the Product or testing the ginger content during the Class Period, and all

tests Coca-Cola conducted or received during the Class Period relating to whether the

Product is “MADE WITH REAL GINGER,” to the extent that information can be

determined in the exercise of reasonable diligence.

INTERROGATORY NO. 12: Identify ALL evidence (INCLUDING ALL DOCUMENTS

and/or witnesses with relevant knowledge) that forms the basis AND/OR supports the

claim on the packaging of the SEAGRAM’S GINGER ALES that they are “MADE WITH

REAL GINGER.”

Case 5:17-cv-00603-EJD Document 59-3 Filed 02/06/18 Page 13 of 18
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

14

DEFENDANT’S AMENDED RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS

TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

CASE NO. 5:17-CV-00603-EJD

10128005v.3

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 12: In addition to the foregoing general

objections, Coca-Cola objects to this Interrogatory as overly broad, unduly burdensome,

and not proportional to the needs of the case, to the extent it seeks “ALL DOCUMENTS”

and “ALL . . . witnesses” without temporal or other limitation. Coca-Cola further objects

to this Interrogatory as duplicative of other discovery requests generally, including

Plaintiff’s First Request for the Production of Documents. Coca-Cola further objects to

this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information that is protected by the attorney-client

privilege, work-product immunity, or any other applicable privilege or immunity.

Notwithstanding and without waiving the foregoing objections, Coca-Cola will identify a

person or persons with knowledge of or experience with substantiation for the statement

that the Product is “MADE WITH REAL GINGER” during the Class Period, and will

identify all tests Coca-Cola conducted or received during the Class Period demonstrating

that the Product is “MADE WITH REAL GINGER,” to the extent that information can

be determined in the exercise of reasonable diligence.

INTERROGATORY NO. 13: State the formula (i.e., the ingredients and the quantity of

EACH ingredient used) used to make EACH of the SEAGRAM’S GINGER ALES during

the CLASS PERIOD. If more than one formula was used, state the dates on which the

formula was or will be used to make the SEAGRAM’S GINGER ALES.

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 13: In addition to the foregoing general

objections, Coca-Cola objects to this Interrogatory as duplicative of Interrogatory No. 14

specifically, and other discovery requests generally, including Plaintiff’s First Request for

the Production of Documents. Coca-Cola further objects to this Interrogatory as

overbroad, unduly burdensome, and not proportional to the needs of the case to the extent

it seeks trade secrets, to the extent it seeks information about ingredients unrelated to the

labeling claim at issue, and to the extent it seeks information about hypothetical future

changes to the Product formula. Coca-Cola further objects to this Interrogatory to the

extent it seeks information not in the possession, custody, or control of Coca-Cola.

Case 5:17-cv-00603-EJD Document 59-3 Filed 02/06/18 Page 14 of 18
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

15

DEFENDANT’S AMENDED RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS

TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

CASE NO. 5:17-CV-00603-EJD

10128005v.3

Notwithstanding and without waiving the foregoing objections, Coca-Cola will identify

the ingredients used in flavoring the Product during the Class Period, and the dates of

changes to the ingredients for flavoring the Product during the Class Period that relate to

the statement that the Product is “MADE WITH REAL GINGER,” to the extent that

information can be determined in the exercise of reasonable diligence.

INTERROGATORY NO. 14: State the formula (i.e., the ingredients and the quantity of

EACH ingredient used) used by EACH FLAVOR SUPPLIER to make EACH of the

flavorings and/or “natural flavors” used to make EACH of the SEAGRAM’S GINGER

ALES during the CLASS PERIOD. If more than one formula was used, state the dates on

which the formula was or will be used in the making of each of the flavorings and/or

“natural flavors” used the make the SEAGRAM’S GINGER ALES.

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 14: In addition to the foregoing general

objections, Coca-Cola objects to this Interrogatory as vague and unintelligble, and as the

phrase “flavorings and/or ‘natural flavors’” is vague and ambiguous. Coca-Cola further

objects to this Interrogatory as duplicative of Interrogatories Nos. 2, 8, and 13

specifically, and other discovery requests generally, including Plaintiff’s First Request for

the Production of Documents. Coca-Cola further objects to this Interrogatory as

overbroad, unduly burdensome, and not proportional to the needs of the case to the extent

it seeks trade secrets, to the extent it seeks information about ingredients unrelated to the

labeling claim at issue, and to the extent it seeks information about hypothetical

prospective changes to the Product formula. Coca-Cola further objects to this

Interrogatory to the extent it seeks the production of information not in the possession,

custody, or control of Coca-Cola. Notwithstanding and without waiving the foregoing

objections, Coca-Cola will identify the ingredients used in flavoring the Product during

the Class Period, and will identify the dates of changes to the ingredients for flavoring the

Product during the Class Period that relate to the statement that the Product is “MADE

WITH REAL GINGER,” to the extent that information can be determined in the exercise

of reasonable diligence.

INTERROGATORY NO. 15: What is the meaning of the phrase “MADE WITH REAL

Case 5:17-cv-00603-EJD Document 59-3 Filed 02/06/18 Page 15 of 18
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

16

DEFENDANT’S AMENDED RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS

TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

CASE NO. 5:17-CV-00603-EJD

10128005v.3

GINGER” on the SEAGRAM’S GINGER ALES?

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 15: In addition to the foregoing general

objections, Coca-Cola objects to this Interrogatory as vague and to the extent it seeks a

legal conclusion. Coca-Cola further objects to this Interrogatory as irrelevant, overbroad,

unduly burdensome, and not proportional to the needs of the case to the extent it seeks

trade secrets, and to the extent it seeks information not relevant to any claim or defense in

this action, to the extent it seeks information equally available to both parties, and to the

extent it seeks Coca-Cola’s subjective opinions not seen or relied upon by Plaintiff.

Coca-Cola further objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information that is

protected by the attorney-client privilege, work-product immunity, or any other

applicable privilege or immunity. Notwithstanding and without waiving the foregoing

objections, Coca-Cola will identify its understanding of the phrase “MADE WITH REAL

GINGER” on the Product during the Class Period, to the extent that information can be

determined in the exercise of reasonable diligence.

INTERROGATORY NO. 16: Provide ALL reasons that YOU decided to MARKET the

SEAGRAM’S GINGER ALES with the representation “MADE WITH REAL GINGER.”

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 16: In addition to the foregoing general

objections, Coca-Cola further objects to this Interrogatory as overbroad, unduly

burdensome, and not proportional to the needs of the case to the extent it seeks trade

secrets, and to the extent it seeks Coca-Cola’s subjective opinions not relied upon by

Plaintiff. Coca-Cola further objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information

that is protected by the attorney-client privilege, work-product immunity, or any other

applicable privilege or immunity. Notwithstanding and without waiving the foregoing

objections, Coca-Cola will describe the timing and circumstances of the addition of the

statement “MADE WITH REAL GINGER” on Seagram’s® Ginger Ale and any

motivations therefor during the Class Period, to the extent that information can be

Case 5:17-cv-00603-EJD Document 59-3 Filed 02/06/18 Page 16 of 18
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

17

DEFENDANT’S AMENDED RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS

TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

CASE NO. 5:17-CV-00603-EJD

10128005v.3

determined in the exercise of reasonable diligence.

Dated: December 6, 2017

/s/ Steven A. Zalesin

Steven A. Zalesin (pro hac vice)

Michelle W. Cohen (pro hac vice)

PATTERSON BELKNAP WEBB & TYLER LLP

1133 Avenue of the Americas

New York, NY 10036-6710

Telephone: 212-336-2000

Facsimile: 212-336-2222

sazalesin@pbwt.com

mcohen@pbwt.com

Tammy B. Webb

Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP

One Montgomery Tower, Suite 2700

San Francisco, CA 94104

Telephone: 415-544-1904

Facsimile: 415-391-0281

tbwebb@shb.com

Attorneys for Defendant The Coca-Cola Company

Case 5:17-cv-00603-EJD Document 59-3 Filed 02/06/18 Page 17 of 18
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

18

DEFENDANT’S AMENDED RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS

TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

CASE NO. 5:17-CV-00603-EJD

10128005v.3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on December 6, 2017, I caused a copy of the foregoing document to

be served by email on the following counsel for Plaintiff:

/s/ Lauren Capaccio

Lauren Capaccio

Case 5:17-cv-00603-EJD Document 59-3 Filed 02/06/18 Page 18 of 18