Communications Litigation Today was a Warren News publication.

Plaintiff Moves to Compel Discovery From Belkin, Citing ‘Obstructive Conduct’

In the more than three months since counsel for plaintiff Dennis Gromov served Belkin with discovery requests in his fraud complaint, “Belkin’s total response has been 38 pages and scores of objections, but no real response at all,” said Gromov’s motion to compel discovery Wednesday (docket 1:22-cv-06918) in U.S. District Court for Northern Illinois. Gromov’s class action alleges Belkin advertised power banks for mobile devices in a deceptive manner, and that the chargers don’t deliver the amount of power promised (see 2301300008). Belkin “alarmingly” claims to have done a reasonable search for documents and repeatedly said no such documents existed, said the motion. But Belkin produced “highly responsive” documents in a different power bank case in California state court “that should have been produced again here,” it said. Belkin has been involved in the California litigation over its mislabeled power banks for four years, “and it knows full well what documents exist,” it said. Belkin also has “hidden” behind its purported need for a protective order, but hasn’t answered Gromov’s July 6 and 7 questions “about how such an order might work,” it said. “Belkin has just been absent from the field here,” said the motion. “Belkin’s conduct is obstructive,” it said. Gromov can’t take depositions of Belkin employees “until Belkin provides answers to his requests,” it said. He asked the court’s help “in getting discovery going further,” it said.