ORDER

CAROLYN K. DELANEY, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff's motion to compel came on regularly for hearing on September 24, 2014. Curtis Holdsworth appeared telephonically for plaintiff. Ashley Wisniewski appeared for defendant. Upon review of the documents in support and opposition, upon hearing the arguments of counsel, and good cause appearing therefor, THE COURT FINDS AS FOLLOWS:

The parties have filed a supplemental statement stipulating that the majority of the discovery dispute has been resolved. The only remaining issues are with respect to requests for production of documents, nos. 2 and 3. Defendant objects to production of the responsive documents on the basis of attorney client privilege1 and the work product doctrine.2 At the hearing, defense counsel clarified that Admiral Insurance is defending this action with a reservation of rights. Plaintiff's counsel conceded at the hearing that communications between defense counsel and Admiral Insurance are not sought by way of the document requests in dispute.3 However, plaintiff's counsel correctly argued that correspondence between defendant and Admiral Insurance, regarding notice or tender of claims and investigative follow-up and which were not created by defense counsel, do not constitute protected work product.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to compel (ECF No. 28) is granted in part. Within thirty days, defendant shall produce responsive documents to requests for production of documents, nos. 2 and 3. Any documents for which a claim of attorney client privilege or work product protection are made need not be produced but shall be separately identified in a privilege log, setting forth the author, recipient, date and general nature of the document. Any reservation of rights letter(s) produced pursuant to this order may redact information setting forth the nature and substance of the coverage dispute.