Vega

Vega v. Honeywell International, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaMay 1, 20203:19-cv-00663California4,693 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. Introduction

18 The Court ordered the parties to submit a Joint Statement addressing 19 their disputes as to Interrogatory #11, Interrogatory #13, and Request for Production #19. 20 (ECF No. 41.) The Parties were to address the relevancy of the discovery, as well as 21 proportionality. Id. at 2. On March 6, 2020 the parties filed their Joint Statement of 22 Discovery Disputes. (ECF No. 42.) The Court will address the parties’ positions during 23 the analysis of the disputes.

II. Legal Standard

25 A party may obtain discovery “regarding any nonprivileged matter that is relevant 26 to any party’s claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case[.]” Fed. R. Civ. 27 P. 26(b)(1). Factors to consider include “the importance of the issues at stake in the 28 action, the amount in controversy, the parties’ relative access to relevant information, the parties’ resources, the importance of the discovery in resolving the issues, and whether the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit.” Id. Information need not be admissible in evidence to be discoverable. Id. However, a court “must limit the frequency or extent of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.