Exhibit B

Case: 1:20-cv-00390 Document #: 156-2 Filed: 05/23/23 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:1311
William F. Northrip 

111 South Wacker Drive 

Chicago, Illinois 60606 

t 312.704.7700 

dd 312.704.7777 

f 312.558.1195 

wnorthrip@shb.com 

ATLANTA | BOSTON | CHICAGO | DENVER | HARTFORD | HOUSTON | KANSAS CITY | LONDON | LOS ANGELES | MIAMI | NEW YORK | 

ORANGE COUNTY | PHILADELPHIA | SAN FRANCISCO | SEATTLE | ST. LOUIS | TAMPA | WASHINGTON, D.C. 

February 9, 2023 

VIA EMAIL 

David L. Gerbie 

Brendan J. Duffner 

Evan M. Meyers 

McGuire Law, P.C. 

55 W. Wacker Drive, 9th Floor 

Chicago, Illinois 60601 

dgerbie@mcgpc.com 

bduffner@mcgpc.com 

emeyers@mcgpc.com 

Re: Plaintiff’s Document Requests Nos. 4 and 5 

Fleury v. Union Pacific Railroad Company

Case No. 20-cv-00390 (N.D. Ill.) 

Dear David, Brendan, and Evan: 

I am writing to follow-up regarding our discussion about Plaintiff’s Document 

Request Nos. 4 (purported “class data”) and 5 (consent) and propose a compromise. 

While maintaining its objections to the scope and breadth of Plaintiff’s Requests 

Union Pacific is willing to produce the following information for each potential class 

member: CDL Number, CDL State, Driver Name, Driver Consent Value, Consent 

Timestamp, First Illinois Scan Date, First Illinois Scan Ramp, Last Illinois Scan Date, 

Last Illinois Scan Ramp, and Last Active Timestamp. Attached to this letter is a 

spreadsheet containing this information for Mr. Fleury (produced as UP00000914). 

Union Pacific believes this production is more than sufficient to allow you to identify 

class members and is fully responsive to Request number 4. As to your request that 

Union Pacific also provide driver birth dates and addresses, Union Pacific maintains 

it position that this information is not necessary for, nor relevant to, class 

certification or any other issue in this case. Moreover, Union Pacific maintains its 

objection that producing birth dates and addresses would be unduly burdensome as 

this information is not centrally stored. 

Union Pacific is not aware of any case where class certification was denied because 

the plaintiff did not have the birth dates or addresses of putative class members. 

However, in an attempt to reach a compromise, Union Pacific agrees that it will not 

argue in any opposition to a motion for class certification that differences in the 

individual class members’ birth dates and or mailing addresses provides a basis for 

defeating class certification. As Union Pacific is agreeing to produce CDL State 

information, Union Pacific reserves the right to oppose class certification based on 

Case: 1:20-cv-00390 Document #: 156-2 Filed: 05/23/23 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:1312
February 9, 2023

Page 2

ATLANTA | BOSTON | CHICAGO | DENVER | HARTFORD | HOUSTON | KANSAS CITY | LONDON | LOS ANGELES | MIAMI | NEW YORK | 

ORANGE COUNTY | PHILADELPHIA | SAN FRANCISCO | SEATTLE | ST. LOUIS | TAMPA| WASHINGTON, D.C. 

the presence of and number of putative class members from states other than 

Illinois. 

With respect to your request that Union Pacific produce finger-scan templates for 

each of the over 40,000 putative class members, we maintain our objections to this 

request. However, in an effort to reach a compromise, Union Pacific does not dispute 

that its AGS system creates a finger-scan template using the same process for each 

person that enrolls. 

Union Pacific offers this compromise as a full resolution of the parties’ disputes with 

respect to Plaintiff’s Document Requests 4 and 5. 

Lastly, we are still in the process of looking into the questions you had concerning 

the produced template data for Mr. Fleury, and intend to follow up on those. 

Sincerely, 

William Northrip 

cc: Melissa A. Siebert 

 Kathleen Ryan 

Lauren M. Gibbons 

 Samuel G. Bernstein 

Case: 1:20-cv-00390 Document #: 156-2 Filed: 05/23/23 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:1313