GSC Logistics, Inc. v. Amazon.com Services LLC

Nature of the dispute

The order addresses a discovery dispute involving Amazon’s privilege log. GSC Logistics, Inc. asked the court to require Amazon.com Services LLC and Amazon Logistics, Inc. to produce documents that Amazon had withheld as protected by attorney-client privilege or the work-product doctrine.

GSC’s position

GSC sought documents and Microsoft Excel files concerning Amazon’s analysis of GSC’s on-time delivery service-level performance. GSC said the analysis was performed for business reasons and would have occurred regardless of expected litigation. GSC also argued that the materials contained factual information rather than protected legal opinions and that GSC had a substantial need for them because the calculations were central to Amazon’s decision to terminate the agreement.

GSC identified issues concerning how Amazon calculated the performance results, including whether it considered mitigating circumstances, how late-arriving milestones affected the calculations, whether it calculated performance by container or by split or unit, and whether it corrected the calculations after discovering a network-wide error.

GSC separately challenged 12 emails and Chime communications that Amazon had withheld under attorney-client privilege. GSC argued that the privilege log did not identify any attorneys participating in those communications.

Amazon’s position

Amazon argued that the disputed materials were prepared because of the prospect of litigation concerning the termination and therefore qualified for work-product protection. Amazon also argued that other disputed documents reflected requests for or communications concerning legal advice about terminating the agreement and were protected by attorney-client privilege.

Amazon further argued that GSC did not have a substantial need for privileged documents. The opinion text also states that Amazon had produced more than 70,000 documents and provided more than 50 hours of testimony.

Ruling

For the reasons stated on the record at the January 16, 2025 conference, Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke ordered that the parties’ requests were granted in part and denied in part. The order does not reproduce the conference’s explanation or identify which particular documents or categories were affected by each part of the ruling. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate ECF No. 83.