Opinion
2:17-cv-01868-RFB-NJK
10-24-2022
IN RE TAHOE RESOURCES, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION
ORDER [DOCKET NOS. 195, 196, 198, 200, 201, 203, 204, 206, 207, 209, 210, 212, 213, 215]
Nancy J. Koppe United States Magistrate Judge.
Pending before the Court are seven motions for issuance of letters rogatory, along with seven sealed versions of the same. Docket Nos. 195, 196, 198, 200, 201, 203, 204, 206, 207, 209, 210, 212, 213, 215. Lead Plaintiff represents that Defendants do not oppose the relief sought, but also that Defendants dispute the relevance of the testimony and documents. See Docket No. 195 at 4; Docket No. 198 at 4; Docket No. 201 at 4; Docket No. 204 at 4; Docket No. 207 at 4; Docket No. 210 at 4; Docket No. 213 at 4. Hence, the Court has been told that there is a dispute as to relevance, but has not been provided any basis for such dispute. Accordingly, Defendants must' file a response to each of the motions for issuance of letter rogatory that either (1) explains the 1 basis for Defendants' position that the testimony and documents are not relevant or (2) indicates that Defendants do not dispute relevance. These responses must be filed by October 31, 2022.
Relevance is assessed even when a motion for issuance of letter rogatory is unopposed. See, e.g., Dish Network LLC v. Jadoo TV, Inc., 2020 WL 6528425, at *2 (N.D. Cal. June 29, 2020).
IT IS SO ORDERED.