• ALJ Gildea Denies Motion to Compel Discovery In Certain Wind And Solar-Powered Light Posts And Street Lamps (337-TA-736)
  • May 9, 2011 | Author: Eric W. Schweibenz
  • Law Firm: Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P. - Alexandria Office
  • On April 28, 2011, ALJ E. James Gildea issued the public version of Order No. 8 (dated April 13, 2011) denying a motion to compel filed by Complainants Duggal Dimensions, LLC, Duggal Energy Solutions, LLC, and Duggal Visual Solutions, Inc. (collectively, “Duggal”) in Certain Wind and Solar-Powered Light Posts and Street Lamps (Inv. No. 337-TA-736).

    In support of the motion, Duggal argued that Respondent The StressCrete Group (“StressCrete”) should be compelled to produce documents concerning litigation between StressCrete and a company known as Skycast since such documents may represent a dispute over product design and bear on StressCrete’s credibility.  StressCrete opposed the motion and argued that its litigation with Skycast concerned the use of a concrete pole for telecommunications circuitry in residential neighborhoods which involved a “completely independent utility patent” and thus was not relevant to the current investigation.

    In the Order, ALJ Gildea noted that Commission Rule 210.27(b) states that a party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is relevant to the claim or defense of any party.  ALJ Gildea further noted, however, that discovery is not unlimited.  Because Duggal presented “only a vague, one-sentence argument for the relevance of the Skycast documents” and Duggal did not “explain how its discovery request is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence,” ALJ Gildea determined that Duggal did not meet its burden to show the requested discovery is relevant to this investigation.  Accordingly, ALJ Gildea denied Duggal’s motion to compel.