Avaya Inc. v. Pearce

Background

Avaya Inc. and Atlas Systems, Inc. submitted a joint discovery letter. Atlas sought a protective order, meaning an order limiting or preventing discovery, to prohibit Avaya from contacting Atlas’s customers and serving subpoenas on them. The letter stated that Avaya wanted to contact and subpoena as many as 20 customers, with permission to seek additional customer discovery if necessary.

Atlas argued that Avaya had not identified the subpoenas or the specific information it wanted. Atlas also argued that Avaya had not explained why customers had material information that Avaya could not obtain from less burdensome sources, including through depositions of the defendants. Avaya argued that the customers had information relevant to Avaya’s claims and Atlas’s defenses, including information about representations Atlas made concerning Avaya licenses and telephones that Atlas sold.

Court’s Analysis

The court noted that nonparties receive extra protection from discovery requests and that courts are particularly reluctant to require a nonparty to provide information that a party can provide. On the record before it, the court found that Avaya had not demonstrated why it needed information from Atlas’s customers before conducting depositions of the defendants or seeking information from the parties.

Ruling

The court denied Avaya’s request to contact and subpoena Atlas’s customers at that stage of discovery. The court stated that, after Avaya conducted more discovery from the parties, Avaya could seek permission to contact and obtain discovery from Atlas’s customers by showing that the information was not otherwise available. Judge Susan Illston entered the order on March 24, 2021. The order concerns discovery and does not decide the underlying claims or defenses.