Opinion
03 C 6469
October 8, 2003
ORDER
Plaintiff, Golden Voice Technology Training, LLC ("Golden Voice"), filed a petition to enforce subpoenas against defendants Foley Lardner and Welsh Katz. The District Court referred this motion to us for a report and recommendation. For the following reasons we recommend that the District Court GRANT the motion and order defendants to produce the documents requested in the subpoenas. We recommend that defendants produce billing invoices and agreements that include the names of the attorneys or paralegals rendering billed legal services, their billing rates, the billed time and the total fees billed, but which are redacted to exclude descriptions of legal services or legal advice provided to clients. These documents should be produced to Golden Voice by 10/17/03.
Defendants are correct that Seventh Circuit law governs this motion because the law of the jurisdiction in which the subpoenas were issued governs a motion to enforce the subpoenas. See Urban Outfitters, Inc. v. DPIC Companies, Inc., 203 F.R.D. 376, 379 (N.D. Ill. 2001). However, plaintiff is correct that Eleventh Circuit law governs the motion for fees. See Henson v. Columbus Bank Trust Co., 770 F.2d 1566, 1575 (11th Cir. 1985). After reviewing all of the case law cited by both sides we find that defendants' billing invoices and agreements are relevant to the motion for fees currently pending in Florida and are thus discoverable. Billing invoices and agreements are discoverable in a contested motion for fees. See Bethishou v. Levy, 1989 WL 122435 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 10, 1989). Whether the Florida District Court decides to use that information in its fee calculation is left to its sound discretion. We will not limit the scope of evidence available to the Florida District Court. We will provide it with all relevant and discoverable information and then it can decide what evidence to use in formulating the final fee calculation.
Specific written objections to this report and recommendation may be served and filed within 10 business days from the date that this order is served. Fed, R. Civ. P. 72(a). Failure to file objections with the District Court within the specified time will result in a waiver of the right to appeal all findings, factual and legal, made by this Court in the report and recommendation. Lorentzen v. Anderson Pest Control, 64 F.3d 327, 330 (7th Cir. 1995).