Filed: Jun. 26, 2013
Latest Update: Jun. 26, 2013
Summary: ORDER CHARLENE EDWARDS HONEYWELL, District Judge. This cause comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation filed by Magistrate Judge Karla R. Spaulding on June 5, 2013 (Doc. 9). In the Report and Recommendation, Judge Spaulding concludes that the balance of factors weighs in favor of permitting more limited discovery, and recommends granting in part PQ Corporation's Application for an Order Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1782(a) to Obtain Discovery for Use in Foreign Proceedings ("PQ's A
Summary: ORDER CHARLENE EDWARDS HONEYWELL, District Judge. This cause comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation filed by Magistrate Judge Karla R. Spaulding on June 5, 2013 (Doc. 9). In the Report and Recommendation, Judge Spaulding concludes that the balance of factors weighs in favor of permitting more limited discovery, and recommends granting in part PQ Corporation's Application for an Order Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1782(a) to Obtain Discovery for Use in Foreign Proceedings ("PQ's Ap..
More
ORDER
CHARLENE EDWARDS HONEYWELL, District Judge.
This cause comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation filed by Magistrate Judge Karla R. Spaulding on June 5, 2013 (Doc. 9). In the Report and Recommendation, Judge Spaulding concludes that the balance of factors weighs in favor of permitting more limited discovery, and recommends granting in part PQ Corporation's Application for an Order Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a) to Obtain Discovery for Use in Foreign Proceedings ("PQ's Application") (Doc. 1). Doc. 9, pp. 6-12. No party has objected to the Report and Recommendation and the time to do so has expired.
Upon review, the Court agrees with Magistrate Judge Spaulding that the fact that Thomas J. Pullukat ("Pullukat") will not be a named party in the Korean litigation and will not be subject to discovery in Korea weigh in favor of granting PQ's Application. Id. at 7-10; see Intel Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., 542 U.S. 241, 263 (2004) (setting out factors to consider when determining whether to grant a 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a) application, including whether the person from whom discovery is sought is a participant in the foreign proceeding, in which case, the need for 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a) is less apparent). However, the Court also agrees that PQ Corporation's proposed subpoenas to Pullukat are unduly broad with respect to time and subject matter. Id. at 12; c.f. Consorcio Ecuatoriano de Telecomunicaciones S.A. v. JAS Forwarding (USA), Inc., 685 F.3d 987, 999 (11th Cir. 2012).
Therefore, after careful consideration of the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, in conjunction with an independent examination of the court file, the Court is of the opinion that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation should be adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED:
1. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. 9) is adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects and is made a part of this order for all purposes, including appellate review.
2. PQ Corporation's Application for an Order Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a) to Obtain Discovery for Use in Foreign Proceedings (Doc. 1) is GRANTED in part:
a) PQ Corporation's request to serve the proposed subpoenas submitted with the Application is DENIED. PQ Corporation may serve more narrowly tailored subpoenas within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order.
b) Pullukat is permitted to object to the resubmitted subpoenas or file a motion for a protective order as provided for by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, after conferring with counsel for PQ Corporation as required by Local Rule 3.01(g).
DONE and ORDERED.
