Opinion
21-cv-04188-EMC (RMI)
02-22-2024
PREMIER FLOOR CARE, INC., Plaintiff, v. ALBERTSONS COMPANIES, INC., et al., Defendants.
ORDER RE: DISCOVERY DISPUTE
RE: DKT. NO. 57
ROBERT M. ILLMAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Now pending before the court is the Parties' jointly-filed discovery dispute letter brief (dkt. 57), which came on for oral argument on February 15, 2024 (dkt. 60). As stated on the record, Plaintiff failed to “detail the basis for [its] contention that it is entitled to the requested discovery and show how the proportionality and other requirements of Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(2) are satisfied.” See Lofton v. Verizon Wireless (VAW) LLC, 308 F.R.D. 276, 280-81 (N.D. Cal. 2018). In essence, Plaintiff simply asserted that it has served discovery responses, that it was dissatisfied, and that it wants an order compelling further responses. See Ltr. Br. (dkt. 57) at 3. As the court explained on the record, Plaintiff failed to bear its burden of showing why the discovery it seeks is relevant to any claim or defense underlying this litigation, and why Defendant's responses were inadequate or why Defendant's objections were unjustified. Hence, Plaintiff's motion to compel is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.