CLEARONE COMMUNICATIONS, INC., a Utah corporation, Plaintiff, vs. ANDREW CHIANG, an individual, JUN YANG, an individual, LONNY BOWERS, an individual, WIDEBAND SOLUTIONS, INC., a Massachusetts corporation, and BIAMP SYSTEMS CORPORATION, an Oregon corporation, Defendants.
Case No: 2:07cv00037TC
United States District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division
2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85617
November 20, 2007
Case assigned to Judge Tena Campbell – Opinion written by Magsitrate Judge Nuffer
The Plaintiff, ClearOne Communications, Inc., moved to compel discovery against Defendant Biamp Systems Corporation. . In general, Biamp complained that many of the requests used the phrase “reflecting” or “relating,” which were omnibus terms that made the request overly broad.
Although Judge Nuffer counseled that “ClearOne should strive to make its requests more precise,” the use of terms such as “relating to,” “pertaining to,” or “concerning” does not necessarily make a request overly broad or unduly burdensome as long as these phrases modify a sufficiently specific type of information.
Motion to compel granted in part.