United States District Court, D. Utah, Central Division
Waddoups District Judge
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
M. Warner Chief Magistrate Judge
Judge Clark Waddoups referred this case to Chief Magistrate
Judge Paul M. Warner pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1)(A). Before the court are (1) Plaintiff
Entrata, Inc.'s (“Entrata”) short form
discovery motion regarding Defendant Yardi Systems,
Inc.'s (“Yardi”) customer relations
database(s); (2) Yardi's short form discovery
motion for a protective order regarding Entrata's second
Rule 30(b)(6) deposition notice, see Fed. R. Civ. P.
30(b)(6); (3) Entrata's short form discovery
motion regarding Yardi's claw-backs; and (4)
Entrata's short form discovery motion for in
camera review by a special master. The court has
carefully reviewed the written memoranda submitted by the
parties. Pursuant to Civil Rule 7-1(f) of the Rules of
Practice for the United States District Court for the
District of Utah, the court has concluded that oral argument
is not necessary and will determine the motions on the basis
of the written memoranda. See DUCivR 7-1(f).
addressing the above-referenced motions, the court sets forth
the following general legal standards governing discovery.
Under Rule 26(b)(1), “[p]arties may obtain discovery
regarding any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any
party's claim or defense and proportional to the needs of
the case.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(1). “Information
within this scope of discovery need not be admissible in
evidence to be discoverable.” Id. “The
district court has broad discretion over the control of
discovery, and [the Tenth Circuit] will not set aside
discovery rulings absent an abuse of that discretion.”
Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Merrill Scott &
Assocs., Ltd., 600 F.3d 1262, 1271 (10th Cir. 2010)
(quotations and citations omitted).
Entrata's Motion Regarding Yardi's Customer Relations
moves the court for an order requiring Yardi to produce all
data from its client relations management database
(“yCRM”) that is responsive to Entrata's
requests for production. Entrata correctly claims that Yardi
does not dispute the relevance of the yCRM data. Entrata
futher contends that by refusing to produce the yCRM data,
Yardi has failed to comply with its obligations under Rule 34
because that rule requires production of responsive yCRM
data. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 34. In response, Yardi
argues that it has compiled reports and other documents from
the yCRM data and provided them to Entrata, which, according
to Yardi, satisfies its obligations under Rule 34 with
respect to Entrata's requests for production.
following reasons, the court concludes that Yardi's
arguments are without merit. First, Yardi has failed to
demonstrate that the yCRM data is not discoverable under Rule
26(b)(1). Yardi does not dispute the relevance of the yCRM
data. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1). Additionally,
Yardi has not presented any arguments concerning the limiting
factors contained in Rule 26(b)(1). Yardi has not argued that
production of the yCRM data is disproportional to the needs
of the case, unduly burdensome, or unduly expensive.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1).
the court has determined that the yCRM data must be produced
pursuant to Rule 34 to the extent any such data is responsive
to Entrata's requests for production. Importantly,
Yardi's position is directly contradicted by Rule 34 and
Rule 34's Advisory Committee Notes.
specifically allows for discovery of “any designated
documents or electronically stored information, ”
including “other data or data compilations.”
the 2006 Advisory Committee Notes for Rule 34 state that
it has become increasingly difficult to say that all forms of
electronically stored information, many dynamic in nature,
fit within the traditional concept of a
“document.” Electronically stored information may
exist in dynamic databases and other forms far different from
fixed expression on paper. Rule 34(a) is amended to confirm
that discovery of electronically stored information stands on
equal footing with discovery of paper documents.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 34 2006 Advisory Committee Notes. Those
authorities make clear that the yCRM data must be produced to
the extent any such data is responsive to Entrata's
requests for production.
those reasons, this motion is granted. Yardi shall produce
any yCRM data that is responsive to Entrata's requests
for production within ...