Oliveira v. Language Line Services, Inc.

Background

The parties asked the court to resolve a discovery dispute about whether plaintiffs could obtain contact and employment-related information for people who may be members of a proposed California class. Plaintiffs’ Interrogatory No. 1 requested the full names, last known addresses, email addresses, employment dates, job titles, and employment locations of California class members who worked for defendants during the defined class period.

Plaintiffs proposed a Belaire-West opt-out process. Under that process, a third-party administrator would send written notice to the proposed California class members, explain that their contact and employment-related information might be disclosed to plaintiffs’ counsel, and give them an opportunity to opt out of that disclosure.

Parties’ Positions

Plaintiffs asked the court to order defendants to respond to Interrogatory No. 1. Defendants had raised several objections but, for this dispute, relied on an asserted threshold legal issue that they intended to brief with their opposition to plaintiffs’ motion for conditional certification. Defendants argued that the issue had to be decided before information about proposed class members was disclosed.

Court’s Analysis

The court concluded that the requested information was relevant and proportional to the needs of the case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1). The court found that the proposed opt-out procedure appeared suited to protecting the privacy interests of current and former employees covered by the proposed California class and class period.

The court rejected defendants’ argument that the dispute involved a new legal issue. It explained that discovery of information identifying proposed class members is common in the Northern District of California. The court also noted that defendants did not dispute that the operative complaint made a preliminary showing that the Rule 23 class-action requirements were met for the California class, and the court independently reached that conclusion after reviewing the complaint.

The court acknowledged that defendants might have viable arguments about the merits of plaintiffs’ California-class claims. It held that those possible arguments did not justify delaying discovery that would allow the parties to identify proposed class members and address class certification.

Ruling and Effect

The court approved the proposed Belaire-West opt-out process and directed defendants to identify the current and former employees covered by Interrogatory No. 1 within 30 days of the order. The third-party administrator was then expected to send the proposed notices shortly afterward, after which defendants were to respond to Interrogatory No. 1. The court invited the parties to submit proposed deadlines if they needed a more specific scheduling order. Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi issued the order as a United States magistrate judge.