## Facts

- Phyllis B. Cerrato and German Cerrato sued Nutribullet, LLC and Capital Brands, LLC after a Nutribullet Pro 900 blender allegedly malfunctioned and the contents “exploded,” causing severe burns and property damage.
- Plaintiffs asserted negligence and strict-liability theories based on alleged defective design and inadequate warnings, plus a loss-of-consortium claim.
- In discovery, plaintiffs requested (1) all accident reports and records relating to any injury allegedly caused by the product and (2) all consumer complaints of any type relating to the product.
- Defendants objected that the requests were overbroad and not proportional to the needs of the case.
- Plaintiffs moved to compel production of the requested materials.

## Issues

1. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1), must defendants produce all accident reports and all consumer complaints relating to the product when the requests lack temporal or subject-matter limits, or may the court restrict or deny discovery as unduly burdensome and disproportionate?

## Decision

- The court denied the motion to compel in part.
- The court held the requests, as drafted, were overbroad, unduly burdensome, and not proportional to the needs of the case.
- The court required a narrower, more targeted scope tied to reasonably similar incidents and a reasonable time frame, rather than open-ended production of all reports and complaints.

## Legal Principles

- Discovery is limited to nonprivileged matter that is relevant to a party’s claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case under Rule 26(b)(1).
- Proportionality considers, among other factors, the importance of the issues, amount in controversy, parties’ access to information, parties’ resources, importance of the discovery to resolving the issues, and whether burden or expense outweighs likely benefit.
- Requests for “all” incident reports or “all” complaints, without reasonable limits (such as time period, product model, or similarity to the alleged failure mode), may be denied or narrowed as disproportionate.
- Discovery concerning other incidents may be permitted when reasonably confined to occurrences sufficiently similar to the incident at issue.

## Conclusion

The court applied Rule 26(b)(1) to restrict broad product-incident discovery, holding that unbounded demands for all accident reports and all consumer complaints were disproportionate and requiring plaintiffs to pursue more tailored discovery focused on reasonably similar incidents within a reasonable time period.


Cerrato v. Nutribullet, LLC, 2017 WL 3608266 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 27, 2017)