Spectrum Scientifics, LLC v. Celestron Acquisition, LLC

Background

This order resolves a discovery dispute involving defendants’ amended deposition subpoena to nonparty Optronics Technologies, Inc. (“Orion”). Defendants sought testimony from an Orion corporate representative under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6), which allows an organization to designate a witness to testify about specified topics. Orion objected to providing any testimony through a corporate representative.

The amended notice contained nine topics. Topics 1 and 2 concerned documents cited or relied on in plaintiffs’ motion for class certification and in the declaration of plaintiffs’ expert, Dr. Zona. Topic 3 concerned Orion’s purchase or acquisition of Meade, including the transaction’s timeline, participants, and terms. Topics 4 through 9 concerned Orion’s telescope purchases, documents produced in the litigation, supply agreements, communications, and product catalogs.

Legal standard

The court explained that discovery under Rule 45 generally has the same scope as discovery under Rule 26(b). Discovery may concern nonprivileged information relevant to a claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case. The court must limit discovery that is unreasonably cumulative or duplicative, can be obtained from a more convenient or less burdensome source, or falls outside the permitted scope. Rule 45 also requires a court to quash or modify a subpoena that subjects a person to undue burden.

Court’s analysis

The court agreed with Orion that most of the amended topics had the same problems as the topics in defendants’ earlier notice. Several topics were drafted in extremely broad terms, and defendants offered only speculative or insufficient reasons for seeking the requested testimony.

For Topic 3, defendants argued that Meade was a key competitor of Celestron and that the nature of Orion’s acquisition of Meade was central to Dr. Zona’s analysis of the relevant market and competitive landscape. The court noted that plaintiffs’ class-certification materials discussed the relevant market, Orion’s acquisition of Meade, and market shares after that acquisition. The court therefore found that some information about the nature of Orion’s acquisition of Meade appeared relevant to matters raised in the class-certification motion. But defendants did not explain why they needed information about the transaction’s timeline or the people and entities involved, or why the full scope of Topic 3 was relevant.

For Topics 1 and 2, defendants appeared to seek testimony about thousands of documents. The court found that requiring Orion to prepare a corporate representative to testify about that volume of documents, particularly documents not generated by Orion, would impose an extraordinary burden. Defendants could not take testimony on those topics unless they first identified the specific documents they intended to address and limited the number to a reasonable amount.

Defendants did not provide a reasonable justification for the other topics in the amended notice.

Ruling and next steps

The court denied defendants’ request for an order requiring Orion to produce a corporate representative to testify about Topics 4 through 9. For Topic 3, the court required Orion to prepare a representative to testify about Orion’s purchase or acquisition of Meade and the terms of that transaction. If defendants sought testimony beyond those matters, they had to identify the additional testimony specifically.

For Topics 1 and 2, Orion did not have to prepare a representative unless defendants specifically identified a reasonable number of Orion documents for examination. Defendants had to promptly tell Orion whether they wanted to proceed with a deposition limited to the allowed portion of Topic 3. If they sought additional Topic 3 testimony or testimony about specific documents under Topics 1 and 2, the parties had to confer about the scope. They were ordered to file a joint status report by July 15, 2024, describing the deposition’s scope, any remaining disagreements, and the deposition date.