Tevra Brands LLC v. Bayer HealthCare LLC
- Beth Freeman
- 5:19-cv-04312
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Tevra Brands v. Bayer HealthCare, Judge Demarchi found Requests 19–20 moot and ordered limited production for Requests 27–31.
Tevra Brands LLC and Bayer HealthCare LLC; the order also concerned documents associated with Bayer AG and Bayer Animal Health GmbH.
What happened
Tevra Brands LLC asked the court to resolve a dispute over document requests directed to Bayer HealthCare LLC. Requests 19 and 20 sought organizational charts and job descriptions, including materials held by Bayer AG and Bayer Animal Health GmbH. Requests 27 through 31 sought documents about a proposed sale of Bayer’s Animal Health division to Elanco Animal Health, Inc., including materials submitted to the Federal Trade Commission.
Tevra withdrew its request for additional documents on Requests 19 and 20, so the court found that dispute moot. For Requests 27 through 31, the court ordered Bayer HealthCare to produce documents reflecting or constituting representations made, and documents produced, by a Bayer entity to the Federal Trade Commission about the proposed sale—but only documents within Bayer HealthCare’s possession, custody, or control. Bayer HealthCare also had to provide a privilege log for any responsive documents it claimed were protected.
The order was issued by United States Magistrate Judge Virginia K. Demarchi in Tevra Brands LLC v. Bayer HealthCare LLC, No. 19-cv-04312-BLF (VKD).
The detailed version
- Tevra Brands LLC v. Bayer HealthCare LLC · No. 5:19-cv-04312
- Beth Freeman
- July 16, 2020
Background
Tevra Brands LLC and Bayer HealthCare LLC asked the court to resolve a discovery dispute concerning several of Tevra’s document requests. The court held a hearing on July 14, 2020.
Requests 19 and 20
Requests 19 and 20 sought all organizational charts and job descriptions created by Bayer HealthCare concerning certain job functions. Tevra argued that charts and descriptions maintained by Bayer AG and Bayer Animal Health GmbH were within Bayer HealthCare’s possession, custody, or control. Bayer HealthCare disagreed.
At the hearing, the court observed that the requests appeared to seek charts and job descriptions created by Bayer HealthCare, not by the two other defendants. Tevra withdrew its request for an order compelling additional production on these requests. The court therefore found the dispute over Requests 19 and 20 moot.
Requests 27 through 31
Requests 27 through 31 broadly sought documents concerning a proposed transaction between Elanco Animal Health, Inc. and Bayer AG. Tevra principally sought documents that a Bayer entity produced to the Federal Trade Commission about the proposed sale of Bayer AG’s Animal Health division to Elanco, as well as representations made to the agency about the sale. Tevra argued that the materials were relevant to defining the market for flea and tick treatments, an issue in the action.
Bayer HealthCare acknowledged having some documents concerning the transaction but stated that many responsive documents, including the requested Hart-Scott-Rodino filing, were likely maintained by Bayer AG and were not within Bayer HealthCare’s possession, custody, or control. Bayer HealthCare also objected that the requests were too broad and sought irrelevant material.
The court concluded that the representations and documents produced to the Federal Trade Commission were likely relevant to the market-definition issue. But the court held that Tevra had not shown entitlement to the full scope of Requests 27 through 31. The court also held that Tevra had not demonstrated that Bayer HealthCare had the legal right to obtain responsive documents from Bayer AG or Bayer Animal Health GmbH upon demand.
Ruling
The court ordered Bayer HealthCare to produce only documents reflecting or constituting representations made, and documents produced, by a Bayer entity to the Federal Trade Commission concerning Bayer AG’s proposed sale of the Bayer Animal Health division to Elanco, and only if those documents were within Bayer HealthCare’s possession, custody, or control. If production was not complete, the court ordered Bayer HealthCare to complete it promptly. The court further ordered that Bayer HealthCare provide an appropriate privilege log for documents within the order’s scope that it claimed were privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure.
Judge Virginia K. Demarchi issued the order.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.