Xfinity, Phone Reseller Can't Agree on Motion to Squash Subpoenas, Says Defense

Xfinity Mobile and GlobalguruTech (GGT), parties in a phone trafficking fraud case, were unable to reach agreement on the defendants’ motion to quash Xfinity Mobile’s subpoenas to six GGT business contacts and for protective order, said a certificate of personal consultation (docket 2:22-cv-01950) filed Wednesday by defense counsel Adam Buck of Radix Law in U.S. District Court for Arizona in Phoenix. Buck said he outlined defendants’ concerns with six new subpoenas, in writing, with Xfinity’s counsel, Gail Podolsky of Carlton Fields, Aug. 22 and Aug. 25, followed by a conference call Monday. Tuesday, plaintiffs GGT and owner Jakob Zahara filed a third motion to quash Xfinity’s subpoenas to GGT business contacts and for a protective order, calling the request “overbroad.” The request would include “irrelevant documents relating to any cell phone transaction” and isn’t limited to Xfinity products, said GGT's motion. In its November complaint, Xfinity alleged GGT and Zahara fraudulently sell Xfinity Mobile phones “in bulk” (see 2211300025). Defendants filed a motion to dismiss, and the court dismissed Xfinity’s conspiracy and trademark claims, but plaintiffs reasserted the two claims in a July 7 amended complaint; defendants responded with a second motion to dismiss. Before the court ruled on the second motion to dismiss, Xfinity “issued a barrage of 18 subpoenas in a six-week period which is just the beginning of the number of subpoenas Plaintiffs intend to issue in this case,” said GGT. Plaintiffs are seeking the “same overbroad and irrelevant information about all transactions instead of limiting their discovery to Xfinity phones,” as alleged in their amended complaint, it said. Xfinity “refused” defendants’ repeated requests to voluntarily narrow the scope of discovery, “but the subpoenas keep coming with the same overly broad requests,” it said. Carlton Fields has represented “every large cell phone carrier” in the U.S. and filed similar lawsuits on their behalf over the years, said GGT's motion. “It appears Plaintiffs are seeking overbroad and irrelevant discovery that includes all types of cell phones to share with the other carriers who can then use the information to sue these Defendants or other small business owners to try to shut them down,” it said.