Sides Far Apart on Discovery in False-Ad Class Action vs. Belkin’s Power Banks

It’s plaintiff Dennis Gromov’s position that Belkin is “stalling the progress” of his false advertising lawsuit against the company by delaying written discovery, said their joint status report Thursday (docket 1:22-cv-06918) in U.S. District Court for Northern Illinois in Chicago. Gromov’s written-discovery requests to Belkin were served April 21, making Belkin’s responses due May 21, said the report. Gromov granted Belkin an extension to June 5, and Belkin served its response at 11 p.m. that night, “but produced zero documents then and still has not,” it said. The parties also had a June 9 meet-and-confer session on Belkin’s extensive discovery objections, it said. Gromov’s position is that the session was “completely unsuccessful” because it didn’t resolve any of Belkin’s objections, said the report. Gromov intends to move to compel Belkin’s responses, it said. Belkin believes Gromov’s characterization of Belkin as stalling the lawsuit and delaying discovery is “unfounded,” said the report. “Belkin has been actively working to collect responsive documents for production,” it said. Belkin also disputes the accuracy of Gromov’s characterization of the meet-and-confer session as completely unsuccessful, said the report: “The parties spent over an hour discussing the perceived deficiencies in each side’s discovery responses. The call ended cordially with both sides agreeing to look into certain issues before reverting back.” Gromov’s class action alleges Belkin advertised power banks for mobile devices in a deceptive manner, and the chargers don’t deliver the amount of power promised (see 2301300008).