Lloyd's

Viasat Inc. v. Lloyd's

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaMarch 17, 20233:22-cv-01169California1,335 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 VIASAT, INC., Case No.: 22-cv-1169-JAH-DDL

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING IN PART

v. MOTION TO COMPEL

DISCOVERY RE NAMES AND

CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT

BOND INFORMATION

LLOYD’S, LONDON (SYNDICATES

15 2623 and 623), [Dkt. No. 24] 16 Defendants.

I. BACKGROUND Before the Court is Plaintiff Viasat, Inc.’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion to Compel discovery regarding names and bond information (“Motion to Compel”). Dkt. No. 24. Defendants Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s London, Syndicates 2623 and 623 (“Defendants”) oppose the Motion to Compel. Dkt. No. 25. On March 10, 2023, the Court heard oral argument on the Motion to Compel. For the reasons stated below, the Motion to Compel is GRANTED IN PART. The Motion to Compel raises three issues: (1) whether this Court has jurisdiction to rule on a motion to compel while a motion to dismiss for lack…

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.