Petconnect Rescue, Inc. v. Salinas

I. BACKGROUND

18 On December 30, 2020, Plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint alleging, in 19 relevant part, that Defendants Ray Rothman and Alysia Rothman violated the Lanham Act, 20 California’s Unfair Competition Law and Consumer Legal Remedies Act, and committed 21 fraudulent deceit for their “puppy laundering scheme.” Dkt. No. 93 at 3. 22 On October 9, 2020, Plaintiff Petconnect Rescue, Inc., Maryland, propounded the 23 following interrogatory to both Ray and Alysia Rothman: “[S]tate YOUR current residence 24 address.” Dkt. No. 92-3 at 11, 18. The Rothmans objected based on a right to privacy and 25 refused to provide a substantive response unless the parties entered into a “protective order 26 limiting the dissemination of [their] contact information.” Dkt. No. 92-3 at 23, 29. 27 28 On December 9, 2020, the Court held a discovery conference regarding the Rothmans’ response to the interrogatories at issue. Dkt. No. 87. On December 23, 2020, Defendants Ray Rothman and Alysia Rothman filed a Motion for Protective Order. Dkt. No. 92. On December 30, 2020, Plaintiffs filed an Opposition. Dkt. No. 94. For the foregoing reasons, the…