United States District Court, D. New Jersey
OPINION & ORDER
S. Kiel United States Magistrate Judge
matter comes before the Court on the parties'
joint-letter regarding a discovery disputes. (ECF Nos. 79.)
The dispute concerns the obligation to translate documents
into English. The documents were produced by defendants, The
Korean Cleaners Monthly and John Chung (together,
“Defendants”), in response to the request by
plaintiffs, NY Machinery Inc. and Kleaners LLC (together,
“Plaintiffs”), for production of documents. For
the reasons that follow, Defendants are neither obligated to
translate the documents nor responsible for bearing the
filed their complaint on November 30, 2017. (ECF No. 1.) They
allege unfair competition, false advertising, defamation,
false light, trade libel, and tortious interference with
prospective economic relations as a result of Defendants'
publication and dissemination of allegedly false and
defamatory statements regarding Plaintiffs and their
products. (Id.) Defendants moved to dismiss the
complaint on January 24, 2018. (ECF No. 10.) District Judge
Susan D. Wigenton granted the motion in part and denied the
motion in part. (ECF Nos. 15 & 16.) Plaintiffs thereafter
filed an amended complaint on June 29, 2018. (ECF No. 17.)
discovery is ongoing. The Court twice extended the fact
discovery deadline, originally scheduled for March 1, 2019.
The fact discovery deadline is now February 28, 2020. (ECF
Nos. 27, 71, 82.) The parties served and responded to
interrogatories. Those responses are not at issue. The matter
before the Court concerns Defendants' responses to
Plaintiffs' request for production.
April 16, 2019, Plaintiffs wrote to Defendants asserting
various deficiencies in Defendants' discovery responses.
(ECF No. 81-1.) In the letter, Plaintiffs' wrote:
Defendants' document production contains numerous
documents, including emails, that appear to be written in
Korean or Japanese. Plaintiffs have incurred the expense of
obtaining certified English translations of documents
contained in their production. We expect Defendants to
promptly produce certified translations of these documents.
to Plaintiffs, on July 9, 2019, Magistrate Judge Leda Wettre
directed Defendants' counsel to respond to
Plaintiffs' August 16, 2019 deficiency letter and produce
outstanding responsive documents by early August 2019. (ECF
No. 73.) On September 4, 2019, Plaintiffs wrote again to
Defendants regarding remaining discovery deficiencies. (ECF
No. 81-2.) Regarding translations of documents, Plaintiffs
Defendants' first and supplemental document productions
contain numerous documents, including emails, that appear to
be written in Korean and Japanese. Defendants' cover
letter dated August 6, 2019 states that certified
translations would be provided, but Defendants have yet to
provide same. Please advise when Defendants will produce
certified translations of these documents.
parties exchanged further correspondence relating to
discovery disputes, which included Plaintiffs' demand
that Defendants provide certified translations of documents.
Additionally, according to Plaintiffs, Judge Wettre, during a
telephone-status conference on September 6, 2019, ordered
Defendants to provide certified translations of
Defendants' document production by September 22, 2019.
(ECF No. 81-3 at 3.) During oral argument on the present
application, Defendants disputed that Judge Wettre ordered
them to provide certified translations of documents.
parties submitted a joint-letter regarding all pending
discovery disputes on November 22, 2019. (ECF No. 79.) The
Court heard argument on December 6, 2019 (the
“Hearing”). The Court permitted the parties to
file supplemental submissions regarding the issue. (ECF No.
82 ¶ 5.). Neither party filed further submissions.