Filed: May 31, 2012
Latest Update: May 31, 2012
Summary: ORDER BOYD N. BOLAND, Magistrate Judge. This matter arises on Becton, Dickinson and Company's Motion Emergency Motion to Compel Mark Toukan's Compliance With April 12, 2012 Order [Doc. # 31, filed 5/24/2012] (the "Motion to Compel). I held a hearing on the Motion to Compel this afternoon and made rulings on the record, which are incorporated here. A tangential issue was raised during the hearing concerning the documents which must be produced pursuant to the command of the Subpoena to Produ
Summary: ORDER BOYD N. BOLAND, Magistrate Judge. This matter arises on Becton, Dickinson and Company's Motion Emergency Motion to Compel Mark Toukan's Compliance With April 12, 2012 Order [Doc. # 31, filed 5/24/2012] (the "Motion to Compel). I held a hearing on the Motion to Compel this afternoon and made rulings on the record, which are incorporated here. A tangential issue was raised during the hearing concerning the documents which must be produced pursuant to the command of the Subpoena to Produc..
More
ORDER
BOYD N. BOLAND, Magistrate Judge.
This matter arises on Becton, Dickinson and Company's Motion Emergency Motion to Compel Mark Toukan's Compliance With April 12, 2012 Order [Doc. # 31, filed 5/24/2012] (the "Motion to Compel). I held a hearing on the Motion to Compel this afternoon and made rulings on the record, which are incorporated here.
A tangential issue was raised during the hearing concerning the documents which must be produced pursuant to the command of the Subpoena to Produce Documents, Information, or Objects [Doc. # 3-2] (the "Subpoena"). In particular, some of the responsive documents or information are alleged by Gen-Probe to be immune from disclosure pursuant to the attorney-client privilege (the "Disputed Materials"). That issue was presented to me previously. In an Order [Doc. # 27] entered on April 12, 2012, I adopted and followed the order of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California (the "California Court"), which held that the Disputed Materials were privileged, and I refused to order the production of the Disputed Materials. See Order [Doc. # 27] at p. 2. I am now informed that the California Court has modified that ruling and has required Gen-Probe to produce the Disputed Materials, and that Gen-Probe has disclosed to BD the Disputed Materials.
On the strength of the most recent order of the California Court, as described to me by the parties, I will require Mr. Toukan to produce all documents responsive to the command of the Subpoena. In the event Mr. Toukan produces any documents which Gen-Probe believes are subject to the attorney-client privilege (and about which the California Court has made no ruling), Gen-Probe may seek relief pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(5)(B).
IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Compel [Doc. # 31] is GRANTED as follows:
(1) Mr. Toukan shall, on or before June 29, 2012, at 9:00 a.m., comply with the command of the Subpoena to Produce Documents, Information, or Objects [Doc. # 3-2];
(2) Mr. Toukan shall appear for and give his deposition on June 29, 2012, at 9:00 a.m., pursuant to a subpoena which shall be served on him in full compliance with the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(b) and D.C.COLO.LCivR 45.1; and
(3) The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this Order on Mark Toukan by United States mail, first class postage prepaid, at his address of record.
