`
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`Case 2:22-cv-01599-KKE Document 168 Filed 11/05/24 Page 1 of 3
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
`AT SEATTLE
`
`Plaintiff(s),
`
`v.
`
`STEVEN FLOYD, et al.,
`
`
`
`
`AMAZON.COM INC., et al.,
`
`
`
`Defendant(s).
`
`CASE NO. C22-1599-KKE
`
`ORDER DENYING MISCELLANEOUS
`MOTIONS WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND
`REQUIRING SUPPLEMENTAL
`PRODUCTION
`
`The Court previously conditioned Plaintiff Steven Floyd’s withdrawal as a named plaintiff
`
`in this case upon his responding to outstanding discovery requests and sitting for a deposition.
`
`Dkt. No. 132. Floyd has not complied with this order, and his counsel now seeks to withdraw their
`
`representation on the grounds that their relationship with him is broken. Dkt. No. 140.1 Defendant
`
`Apple Inc. does not oppose the motion, but requests that the Court impose conditions before
`
`permitting Floyd’s counsel to withdraw. Dkt. No. 143.
`
`
`
`After Floyd’s counsel filed the motion to withdraw representation, Apple and Defendant
`
`Amazon.com Inc. filed a motion for discovery sanctions against Floyd for his failure to comply
`
`with the Court’s order. Dkt. No. 152. Defendants request that the Court order Floyd to show cause
`
`
`1 This order refers to the parties’ briefing using CM/ECF page numbers.
`
`
`ORDER DENYING MISCELLANEOUS MOTIONS WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND REQUIRING
`SUPPLEMENTAL PRODUCTION - 1
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-01599-KKE Document 168 Filed 11/05/24 Page 2 of 3
`
`
`
`why he should not be held in contempt, and that if he does not do so, the Court should consider
`
`imposing additional requirements. Id. Floyd’s counsel does not oppose the motion. Dkt. No. 156.
`
`With respect to the motion to withdraw representation, Apple2 requests that as a condition
`
`of withdrawal, the Court order Floyd’s counsel to provide all of their communications to/from
`
`Floyd since January 2024 for in camera review, and provide to Defendants any non-privileged
`
`communications with Floyd since January 2024 along with a privilege log for the in camera
`
`submissions, “with information sufficient to show the method of communication, the
`
`sender/copied/recipient information, the subject line, and any attachments of draft filings or filings
`
`and their file names.” Dkt. No. 143 at 6.
`
`
`
`“The decision to grant or deny counsel’s motion to withdraw is ultimately committed to
`
`the discretion of the trial court.” Fujifilm Sonosite, Inc. v. Imaging Specialists Grp., LLC, No.
`
`C13-983 RSM, 2014 WL 1400992, at *1 (W.D. Wash. Apr. 10, 2014). “When ruling on motions
`
`to withdraw, courts consider: (1) the reasons why withdrawal is sought; (2) the prejudice
`
`withdrawal may cause to other litigants; (3) the harm withdrawal might cause to the administration
`
`of justice; and (4) the degree to which withdrawal will delay the resolution of the case.” 3M Co.
`
`v. Aime LLC, No. 2:20-cv-01086-TL-BAT, 2023 WL 1863517, at *1 (W.D. Wash. Feb. 9, 2023)
`
`(quoting Bernstein v. City of Los Angeles, No. CV 19-03349 PA (GJSx), 2020 WL 4288443, at *1
`
`(C.D. Cal. Feb. 25, 2020)).
`
`
`
`In this case, the Court agrees with Apple that more information from Floyd’s counsel is
`
`needed in order to resolve questions of delay, prejudice, and harm to the administration of justice,
`
`before the Court can adjudicate the motion to withdraw representation. Likewise, that same
`
`information is needed before the Court can determine the appropriate sanction, if any, for Floyd’s
`
`
`2 Amazon takes no position on Floyd’s counsel’s motion to withdraw and does not join Apple’s opposition to this
`motion. Dkt. No. 145.
`
`ORDER DENYING MISCELLANEOUS MOTIONS WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND REQUIRING
`SUPPLEMENTAL PRODUCTION - 2
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-01599-KKE Document 168 Filed 11/05/24 Page 3 of 3
`
`
`
`failure to comply with this Court’s order. Thus, the Court will deny without prejudice both
`
`motions, subject to re-filing after the production as follows:
`
`(1) No later than November 15, 2024, Floyd’s counsel is ORDERED to produce all non-
`
`privileged communications to/from Floyd since the date that Defendants first
`
`propounded their discovery requests through November 5, 2024.3 Floyd’s counsel
`
`must also produce a privilege log for all privileged communications to/from Floyd
`
`since the date that Defendants’ first discovery requests were propounded through
`
`November
`
`5,
`
`2024,
`
`indicating
`
`the method
`
`of
`
`communication,
`
`the
`
`sender/copied/recipient information, the subject line, and any attachments of draft
`
`filings or filings and their file names.
`
`(2) Upon review of the non-privileged communications and the privilege log detailed in
`
`subsection (1), Defendants may file an appropriate motion no later than December 2,
`
`2024, including but not limited to a motion for in camera review of communication(s)
`
`listed on the privilege log.
`
`(3) Floyd’s counsel’s motion to withdraw representation and Defendants’ motion for
`
`sanctions (Dkt. Nos. 140, 152) are DENIED without prejudice, subject to refiling after
`
`any motion filed by Defendants (as contemplated in subsection (2)) is resolved.
`
`
`
`Dated this 5th day of November, 2024.
`
`A
`
`Kymberly K. Evanson
`United States District Judge
`
`
`3 It appears that Floyd objected to discovery requests in October 2023 (Dkt. No. 90 at 31–75), but it is not clear when
`Defendants propounded those requests. Defendants have accused Floyd of failing to respond substantively to
`discovery requests even before he failed to comply with the Court’s order granting the motion to compel. See, e.g.,
`Dkt. No. 86 at 14. Given that Floyd’s responses and non-responses to discovery requests have been and continue to
`be at issue, the Court finds it appropriate to seek information dating back to when Floyd’s obligation to respond to
`discovery requests began running.
`
`ORDER DENYING MISCELLANEOUS MOTIONS WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND REQUIRING
`SUPPLEMENTAL PRODUCTION - 3
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`