Opinion
8:20-cv-1469-JSM-JSS
09-21-2021
SMART COMMUNICATIONS HOLDING, INC., Plaintiff, v. CORRECT SOLUTIONS, LLC, Defendant.
ORDER
JULIE S. SNEED UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Correct Solutions, LLC's (“CSG's”) Motion to Compel Discovery Responses (Dkt. 72), Smart Communications Holding, Inc.'s (“Smart's”) Response in Opposition (Dkt. 81), Smart's Motion to Compel (Dkt. 84), and CSG's Response in Opposition (Dkt. 90). On September 21, 2021, the Court conducted a hearing on the Motions. Upon consideration, and for the reasons stated during the hearing, it is ORDERED:
1. CSG's Motion to Compel Discovery Responses (Dkt. 72) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows:
a. With respect to Request for Production Nos. 30, 58, 65-72 from CSG's Fourth Request for Production of Documents, the Motion is GRANTED. To the extent the records pertaining to Request Nos. 65-72 contain sensitive financial information, Smart may redact such information as it relates to the license agreement, but shall disclose all
documents relating to the nature of the services provided by Lattice, Inc.
b. With respect to Interrogatory Nos. 3, 5, 6, 10 from CSG's Second Interrogatories, Interrogatory Nos. 1 and 3 from CSG's First Interrogatories to Smart Collier, and Request for Production Nos. 615 from CSG's Fourth Request for Production of Documents, the Motion is DENIED. Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(1); Gonzalez v. GEICO Gen. Ins. Co., No. 8:15-cv-240-T-30TBM, 2016 WL 7734076, at * 2 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 15, 2016) (“Although the federal rules generally allow for liberal discovery in civil matters, such is not unbounded. The Court must consider proportionality to the needs of the case.”).
2. Smart's Motion to Compel (Dkt. 84) is DENIED to the extent that Smart indicated Request Nos. 5 and 6 are withdrawn, and Request Nos. 3 and 4 request information that are outside the scope of relevant and proportional discovery. Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(1).
DONE and ORDERED.