CIV531938 IMPACT PAPER & INK, LTD VS. ALAN SAJADI, ET AL.

IMPACT PAPER & INK, LTD MARC L. JACCUZZI

PACIFIC BUSINESS SUPPLIES DAVID S. GRIFFITH

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL COMPLIANCE WITH SUBPOENA FOR BUSINESS RECORDS

GRANTED. The Motion of Plaintiff Impact Paper and Ink Ltd. (“Impact Paper”) to Compel Compliance with Deposition Subpoena for Business Records from non-party Carl Hanson (“Mr. Hanson”), is Granted. Mr. Hanson shall comply with the Subpoena as set forth below.
This is a wrongful competition action in which Plaintiff Impact Paper sues a former employee Alan Sajadi for unfair competition allegedly being carried on by Mr. Sajadi and his long-time friend Carl Hanson. It is alleged that Sajadi and Hanson are conspiring in unlawful solicitation of Plaintiff Impact Paper’s customers and wrongful appropriation of trade secrets of Impact Paper. Sajadi and Hason allegedly formed a competing company Pacific Business Supplies to do so.
On November 30, 2017, Plaintiff issued two subpoenas: (1) Amended Notice to Consumer or Employee directed to Defendant Alan Sajadi and his attorney of record for Mr. Hanson’s records (“first subpoena”), and (2) Amended Deposition Subpoena for Production of Business Records to Mr. Hanson (“second subpoena”). (See Jacuzzi Decl., Exh. A.) Mr. Hanson served an objection to the first subpoena. (See Mr. Hanson Decl., Exh. A.) Plaintiff seeks in this motion to compel compliance with the second subpoena. Nevertheless, because Plaintiff confusingly served two deposition subpoenas at the same time, the court construes Mr. Hanson’s objection to the first subpoena as his objection to the second subpoena as well.

However, Mr. Hanson fails to raise a valid objection to the second subpoena. Mr. Hanson objected to the subpoena only on the ground that the company he works for, Pacific Business Supplies, Camino, is not affiliated with Defendant Pacific Business Supplies. This is not a valid objection though, and the evidence presented by Plaintiff suggests otherwise. (See McCoy Reply Decl., and attached exhibits.)

Accordingly, the motion to compel compliance with the second subpoena is GRANTED. Mr. Hanson is to produce all responsive documents in his possession, custody or control for the 56 categories of documents identified in Plaintiff’s second subpoena by March 15, 2018. To the extent that Plaintiff is seeking documents regarding Pacific Business Supplies Camino by Hanson that are not in Mr. Hanson’s possession, custody or control, he is not required to produce them since the deposition subpoena is only directed to him individually.

Both Plaintiff’s and Mr. Hanson’s requests for monetary sanctions are DENIED.
Plaintiff’s evidentiary objections are OVERRULED.
Plaintiff’s request for judicial notice is GRANTED.