Filed: Jan. 10, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 10, 2020
Summary: ORDER RICHARD A. JONES , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on Defendant Great Lakes' objections to the order granting in part and denying in part Plaintiff's motion to compel. Dkt. # 90. Great Lakes makes three objections to Magistrate Judge Theiler's order. First, Great Lakes objects to the magistrate's determination that attorney-client privilege does not apply to the to the documents listed in Great Lakes' privilege log entries 5, 6-9, 10-16, 18-22, and 24-69. Second, Gre
Summary: ORDER RICHARD A. JONES , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on Defendant Great Lakes' objections to the order granting in part and denying in part Plaintiff's motion to compel. Dkt. # 90. Great Lakes makes three objections to Magistrate Judge Theiler's order. First, Great Lakes objects to the magistrate's determination that attorney-client privilege does not apply to the to the documents listed in Great Lakes' privilege log entries 5, 6-9, 10-16, 18-22, and 24-69. Second, Grea..
More
ORDER
RICHARD A. JONES, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Great Lakes' objections to the order granting in part and denying in part Plaintiff's motion to compel. Dkt. # 90.
Great Lakes makes three objections to Magistrate Judge Theiler's order. First, Great Lakes objects to the magistrate's determination that attorney-client privilege does not apply to the to the documents listed in Great Lakes' privilege log entries 5, 6-9, 10-16, 18-22, and 24-69. Second, Great Lakes objects to the magistrate's determination that the work product protections of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 do not apply to the to the documents listed in Great Lakes' privilege log entries 5-16, 18-24, 32-34, 36, 38, 42, 46, 47-48, 59-61, 65-67, 69-70, 72. And third, Great Lakes objects to the magistrate's order compelling the deposition of Great Lakes' outside counsel, Michael Hooks.
Although the Court finds no error in the magistrate's analysis, the Court will order an in camera review of the documents at issue above. If the assertions of privileges prove to be baseless after review, the Court may exercise its discretion to issue sanctions. Rachel v. Banana Republic, Inc., 831 F.2d 1503, 1508 (9th Cir. 1987).
Great Lakes is ORDERED to submit the documents listed above for in camera review no later than 4:00pm on Monday, January 13, 2020. In an abundance of caution, the Court will issue a temporary stay of the magistrate's order pending review.
