Certified Collectibles Group, LLC v. Globant, LLC

Should Globant be subject to evidentiary and monetary sanctions, including:

• the entry of an order deeming Globant to have not responded at all to CCG’s interrogatories, waiving Globant’s objections, and preventing Globant from introducing certain evidence pertaining to the interrogatory topics at trial or on dispositive or other motions; and
• requiring Globant to pay CCG’s reasonable costs in connection with the Motion to Compel, the two follow-up status conferences, the instant Motion, and CCG’s other purported efforts to obtain the discovery that CCG places at issue?

The court found it appropriate that CCG’s Motion be granted in part and denied in part.

Specifically, CCG was awarded fees and costs incurred in bringing its Motion to Compel (Doc. 59). Globant’s First Interrogatory Responses were “woefully deficient.” Rule 37(a)(5)(A) states that if a motion to compel is granted or if the requested discovery is provided after the motion was filed, the court must, after giving an opportunity to be heard, require the party whose conduct necessitated the motion to compel, the party or attorney advising that conduct, or both, to pay the movant’s reasonable expenses incurred in making the motion, including attorney’s fees. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5)(A). However, the court must not order payment if: (i) the movant filed the motion without attempting in good faith to confer with the opposition; (ii) the opposing party’s nondisclosure, response, or objection was substantially justified; or (iii) other circumstances make an award of expenses unjust. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5)(A)(i)-(iii). The court determined that none of these three exceptions applied, and thus, Globant was required to pay fees and costs incurred by CCG in bringing its Motion to Compel.

However, the court found that sanctions were not warranted at the time for any conduct after the motion to compel hearing. Specifically, no sanctions were warranted as to Globant’s First Amended Responses to CCG’s Interrogatories and Globant’s Second Amended Responses to CCG’s Interrogatories. The court found that since the August 31, 2020 hearing, Globant had complied with the Order, operated in good faith, and expended significant effort to cure the discovery deficiencies discussed at the hearing. Rule 37(b)(2)(A) states that evidentiary sanctions may be awarded if a party fails to obey a discovery order. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(A). Further, Rule 37(b)(2)(B) states that if a party fails to obey a discovery order, the court must order the disobedient party, the attorney advising that party, or both, to pay the movant’s reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, caused by the failure, unless the failure was substantially justified or other circumstances make an award of expenses unjust. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(B). CCG contended that Globant’s Amended Responses to Interrogatory Nos. 4, 5, 7, 8, 16, 17, and 18 were improper. However, whether the responses are proper for purposes of a motion for sanctions depends on whether the responses comply with the Court’s Order. The court found that the First Amended Responses complied with the Order because Globant had made good faith efforts to meet its discovery obligations by supplementing the original response.

Order