Cutera, Inc. v. Lutronic Aesthetics, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CUTERA, INC., No. 2:20-cv-0235 KJM DB Plaintiff, v. ORDER LUTRONIC AESTHETICS, Defendants. 16 This matter came before the undersigned on April 29, 2022, for hearing of plaintiff’s motion to compel and for sanctions pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(1). (ECF No. 66.) Attorney Ulrico Rosales appeared via Zoom on behalf of plaintiff. Attorney James Odlum appeared via Zoom on behalf of defendant. Having considered the parties’ briefing and oral argument plaintiff’s motion is granted in part and denied in part. The parties’ Joint Statement re Discovery Disagreement reflects that the parties’ dispute concerns the following five issues. 1. Plaintiff’s RFP Nos. 27 & 59 Defendant argues that these requests are overbroad. (JS (ECF No. 74) at 11-12.) “When a request is overly broad on its face, the party seeking the discovery has the burden to show the relevancy of the request.” Johnson v. Kraft Foods…