Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Johnson v. USANA Health Sciences

United States District Court, D. Utah, Central Division

November 15, 2019

Lynn Allen Johnson, Plaintiff,
v.
USANA Health Sciences., Defendant.

          Robert J. Shelby District Judge

          Brooke Wells Magistrate Judge

          MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION TO QUASH WITHOUT PREJUDICE

          DUSTIN B. PEAD UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

         This matter is referred to the undersigned from Judge Robert J. Shelby in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A). Before the court is Plaintiff Lynn Johnson's Short Form Discovery Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum, or in the alternative, Motion for Protective Order. (ECF No. 90.) After reviewing the memoranda and relevant case law, the court finds that oral argument will not assist in adjudicating the motion and therefore under Local Rule 7-1(f) the court will determine the motion on the basis of the written papers. As set forth below, the court will deny the motion to quash, or in the alternative, for protective order without prejudice.

         BACKGROUND

         In October 1997, Plaintiff was an independent contractor, or associate with Defendant USANA, selling USANA's products and recruiting new associates. USANA is a network marketing company that uses an independent sales force to sell nutritional supplements, personal care, and food products throughout the United States and in many other countries. Plaintiff enjoyed success as an associate and received certain awards recognizing her success. On June 21, 2011, USANA, terminated Plaintiff's “distributorship for being on a telephone call wherein the benefit plan of another network marketing company was discussed.” Complaint ¶ 34, ECF No. 2.

         Subsequent to the termination, Plaintiff filed this suit alleging violations of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1, 2, the Utah Antitrust Act, Utah Code Ann. §§ 76-10-3101 et seq. and for breach of contract, fraudulent concealment, fraud in the inducement, and declaratory relief. In essence, Plaintiff claims Defendant's actions including “illegal and collusive acts, ” deprived Plaintiff and other distributors from the benefits of free and open competition, which led to financial losses and specifically the loss of Plaintiff's “downline organization she developed over a thirteen-year period.”

         On September 12, 2019, Defendant served a subpoena duces tecum on third party Ariix, a competitor to Defendant. Defendant alleges Plaintiff violated her agreements when she invited USANA Associates to participate in an ‘opportunity call' with Arix ….” Def.'s Op. p. 2, ECF No. 95. The subpoena seeks inter alia, information concerning the call, Plaintiff's communications with Arix, Arix's policies and procedures, the identification of others associated with Plaintiff, and financial documents. Specifically, the subpoena requests Ariix to:

1. Produce all documents, including without limitation communications, relating to the Ariix Call, including, without limitation, (1) documents reflecting the identity of participants; (2) marketing materials prepared for, referred to, identified in, or used during the call; (3) documents relating to the planning of or preparation for the Ariix Call; (4) any distributor agreements with any participants in the Ariix call; and (5) any recordings, transcripts, minutes or notes of the Ariix Call.
2. Produce all documents including, without limitation communications, from January l, 2010, to January 1, 2013, relating to Johnson's contracting with, joining, or otherwise participating as a distributor with Ariix.
3. Produce all documents demonstrating all earnings Johnson has received and revenues she has generated from January 1, 2011 to the present from operating a distributorship for, or otherwise selling products, on behalf of Ariix.
4. Produce all Ariix policies and procedures that have been in effect from January l, 2010 to the present.
5. Produce all communications between you and Johnson from January 1, 2010, to January 1, 2013.
6. Produce all communications between you and any person or entity from January 1, 2010, to January 1, 2013, relating to ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.