by bvernia | September 4th, 2009
Magistrate Judge Humphreys in Kansas issued an order granting Boeing and its subcontractor most of the relief they sought in discovery in a declined qui tam.
The relators, former Boeing inspectors, allege that the subcontractor, Ducommun, Inc., produced defective parts for airplanes which the US purchased. During discovery, the relators also sought documents relating to two airplanes which the US had not purchased, Boeing’s 767 and 777 models. Judge Humphrey agreed that the documents were relevant within the broad scope of discovery, but that burden and expense of complying outweighed the likely benefit.
She likewise granted Boeing’s request for protective orders regarding 30(b)(6) depositions, and relieving three former employees from having to testify at fact depositions.
Judge Humphreys faulted relators’ counsel for failing to meet-and-confer, quoting their statement in one letter:
Your letter is such an utter repudiation of our Notice that our response to your “Oh yeah?” can only be an emphatic, “YEAH.”
Boeing is represented by Perkins Coie of Seattle, and Wichita’s Foulston Siefkin LLP; Ducommun is represented by LA’s McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP and Fleeson, Gooing, Coulson & Kitch, LLC in Wichita. Relators’ counsel is Clausen Miller, P.C. in Chicago, and Sherwood, Harper, Dakan, Unruh & Pratt LC of Wichita.
