Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

IQVIA INC. v. Veeva Systems, Inc.

United States District Court, D. New Jersey

September 12, 2018

IQVIA, INC. and IMS SOFTWARE SERVICES, LTD, Plaintiffs/ Counterclaim Defendants,
v.
VEEVA SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant/ Counterclaim Plaintiff.

          ORDER AND OPINION OF THE SPECIAL MASTER

          DENNIS M. CAVANAUGH, U.S.D.J.

         This matter comes before the Special Master on Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff Veeva Systems, Inc.'s ("Veeva") motion to compel Plaintiffs-Counterclaim Defendants IQVIA, Inc. and IMS Software Services, LTD, (collectively "IQVIA") to (1) compel IQVIA to supplement its responses to Veeva's Interrogatory Nos. 4, 8, and 12; and (2) require IQVIA to produce documents related to the United State and global or geographic areas including the United States. After considering the submissions of the parties, based upon the following, it is the opinion of the Special Master that Veeva's motion is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part.

         DISCUSSION

         I. Discovery Standard

         Pursuant to Rule 26(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, parties may obtain discovery of "any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action." Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(1). Discoverable material is not limited to that which would be admissible at trial, but also includes any non-privileged information that "appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence." Id. Relevance has been construed liberally under Rule 26(b)(1), to "encompass any matter that bears on, or that reasonably could lead to other matter[s] that could bear on, any issue that is or may be in the case." Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340, 351 (1978). While relevant information need not be admissible at trial in order to grant disclosure, the burden remains on the party seeking discovery to "show that the information sought is relevant to the subject matter of the action and may lead to admissible evidence." Caver v. City of Trenton, 192 F.R.D. 154, 159 (D.N.J. 2000). "Discovery is not a fishing expedition." Arena v. RiverSource Life Ins. Co., No. 2:16-CV-5063-JLL-SCM, 2017 WL 6513056, at *2 (D.N.J. Dec. 19, 2017)

         In this Circuit, "[i]t is well recognized that the federal rules allow broad and liberal discovery." Pacitti v. Macy's, 193 F.3d 766, 777-78 (3d Cir.1999) (citation omitted). Nevertheless, "this right is not unlimited and may be circumscribed." Bayer AG v. Betachem, Inc., 173 F.3d 188, 191 (3d Cir.1999). Pursuant to Rule 26(b)(2)(C)(3), "the court must limit the ... extent of discovery otherwise allowed by these rules ... if it determines that... the burden [ ] of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit." Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(2)(C)(3). Courts consider "the importance of the discovery in resolving the issues" at stake in the case in determining whether the burden of the discovery outweighs its likely benefit. Id.

         II. Interrogatories 4, 8, and 12

         Veeva seeks to compel IQVIA to supplement its responses to Veeva's Interrogatory Nos. 4, 8, and 12.

Interrogatory No. 4
Identify any IMS, Cededim, or Reltio employee, independent contractor, agent, or partner who discussed, evaluated, or decided TPA policy, negotiated TPAs with any person, or communicated with customers about TPAs.
Interrogatory No. 8
Identify any IMS or Cegedim employee, independent contractor, agent, or partner who discussed, evaluated, proposed, communicated, or negotiated any agreement, understanding, or instruction identified in Interrogatory No. 7.
Interrogatory No. 12
Identify any IMS or Reltio employee, independent contractor, agent, or partner who discussed, proposed, negotiated, or approved any agreement ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.