§Why CasetextPricing

In re Banc of California Securities Litigation,

REPLY in Support MOTION to Compel Banc of California and Certain Non-Parties to Produce Improperly Withheld Documents and Produce Amended Privilege Logs that Comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 480

6 Cited authorities

  1. Bittaker v. Woodford

    331 F.3d 715 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 695 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a waiver of attorney-client privilege for purposes of raising an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim does not extend to retrial, in part because "[e]xtending the waiver ... would immediately and perversely skew the second trial in the prosecution's favor"

  2. Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. v. U.S. Dist. Court for the Dist. of Mont.

    403 F.3d 1042 (9th Cir. 2005)   Cited 552 times
    Holding "that boilerplate objections or blanket refusals inserted into a response to a Rule 34 request for production of documents are insufficient to assert a privilege"

  3. Board of Trust. Leland Stanford v. Roche Molecular

    237 F.R.D. 618 (N.D. Cal. 2006)   Cited 39 times
    Holding that where "the disclosures were made deliberately in order to secure a legal advantage," the scope of the waiver is broad

  4. Cotton v. Privatebank and Trust Company

    235 F. Supp. 2d 809 (N.D. Ill. 2002)   Cited 31 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "factual documents which give rise to suspicious conduct . . . are to be produced in the ordinary course of discovery because they are business records made in the ordinary course of business"

  5. Theranos, Inc. v. Fuisz Techs., Ltd.

    Case No.: C 11-5236 PSG (N.D. Cal. May. 16, 2013)   Cited 8 times

    Case No.: C 11-5236 PSG 05-16-2013 THERANOS, INC., et al, Plaintiffs, v. FUISZ TECHNOLOGIES, LTD., et al, Defendants. PAUL S. GREWAL ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (Re: Docket No. 130) Patent cases seem to give rise to a disproportionate number of disputes regarding the scope of waiver attaching to a disclosure of privileged documents. This case is yet another example. Plaintiffs Theranos, Inc., et al, ("Theranos") move to compel Defendants Fuisz Technologies, Ltd., et al

  6. Vieste, LLC v. Hill Redwood Development

    No. C-09-04024 JSW (DMR) (N.D. Cal. Nov. 18, 2010)   Cited 2 times

    No. C-09-04024 JSW (DMR). November 18, 2010 ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL DONNA RYU, Magistrate Judge Before the Court is Plaintiffs' Renewed Motion to Compel Documents Improperly Withheld as Privileged. See Docket No. 140. Having considered the parties' briefs and accompanying submissions, as well as the oral argument of counsel at the November 17, 2010 hearing, the Court hereby GRANTS Plaintiffs' Renewed Motion to Compel Documents Improperly Withheld as Privileged. I. Factual and