42 F. Supp. 3d 319
D.P.R.2014Background
- GDB moved to quash Westernbank D&Os' second subpoena (Sept 2013) for a video deposition and document production.
- Dispute centers on three areas: Project Themis, Plaza CCD project valuation/analysis/audits, and GDB plans for the Convention Center District and related litigation.
- GDB had already produced Plaza CCD documents (2008–2010) following an earlier subpoena.
- Undue burden analysis governs quash/modification under Fed. R. Civ. P. 45, with weight given to non-party burdens.
- The court granted in part and denied in part the motion, addressing Project Themis, Plaza CCD materials, and the CCD plan/litigation requests.
- For Project Themis, the court quashes production as undue burden; for Plaza CCD materials, it requires non-privileged productions and allows privilege logs; for CCD plans, the request is denied without prejudice to further development.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Project Themis documents must be produced | D&O's seek Project Themis materials | GDB argues undue burden and non-necessity | Quashed; undue burden; non-party burden weighs in favor |
| Whether Plaza CCD valuation/analysis documents are discoverable | D&O seeks additional Plaza CCD materials | GDB asserts duplication and Puerto Rico/offical info privilege | Non-privileged docs must be produced; privilege log required; privilege may be asserted with federal privilege standards; otherwise denied without prejudice |
| Whether GDB's plans for the Convention Center District should be produced | Relevance to plans and related litigation | Requests directed to PRCCDA; burden unexplained | Denied without prejudice due to lack of developed record on relevance and burden |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Int’l Bus. Machs. Corp., 83 F.R.D. 97 (S.D.N.Y.1979) (undue-burden factors court considers)
- Heidelberg Ams., Inc. v. Tokyo Kikai Seisakusho, Ltd., 333 F.3d 38 (1st Cir.2003) (special weight to non-parties' burden in discovery)
- Cusumano v. Microsoft Corp., 162 F.3d 708 (1st Cir.1998) (non-party burden considered in discovery balance)
- Evans v. City of Chicago, 231 F.R.D. 302 (N.D. Ill.2005) (deliberative process privilege guidance; PR privilege counterpart)
- Landry v. F.D.I.C., 204 F.3d 1125 (D.C.Cir.2000) (deliberative process privilege requirements and privilege log)
- Providence Journal Co. v. U.S. Dep’t of Army, 981 F.2d 552 (1st Cir.1992) (predecisional/deliberative requirements and protection)