Preview
Filing # 77626317 E-Filed 09/09/2018 06:24:33 PM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
17'™ JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND
FOR BROWARD COUNTY FLORIDA
CASE NO.: CACE-14-001087(04)
PLANET T UNIFORMS, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
FLORIDA CHARTER FOUNDATION, INC.
D/B/A FRANKLIN ACADEMY CHARTER
SCHOOL, DISCOVERY SCHOOLS, _ INC.,
iUNIFORMS, INC., RICHARD SHELLOW, JON
THOMAS ROGERS, AND SCOTT SZNITKEN,
Defendants.
/
PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTION TO FLORIDA CHARTER FOUNDATION, INC.’S
NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM WITHOUT
DEPOSITION
COMES NOW Plaintiff, PLANET T UNIFORMS, INC. (“Plaintiff”), by and through
the undersigned counsel, pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.351(b), hereby files this
Objection to Defendant, FLORIDA CHARTER FOUNDATION, INC.’s Notice of Intent to
Serve Subpoena Duces Tecum Without Deposition, directed to (i) Indian Ridge Middle School
(ii) Nova — Dwight D. Eisenhower (iii) Pines Charter Middle School (iv) Pines Charter High
School (v) Cooper City Elementary (vi) Pioneer Middle School (vii) Pines Middle School (viii)
Pembroke Pines Elementary (ix) Somerset Prep Middle & High School (x) Somerset Prep
Elementary, and in support states as follows:
Defendant seeks to issue Subpoenas directed at ten different schools aimed at
accomplishing no other purpose than to harass Planet T and its educational clients in the area.
Defendant’s request for contracts, communications, uniform sales reports and spreadsheets
*4* FILED: BROWARD COUNTY, FL BRENDA D. FORMAN, CLERK 9/9/2018 6:24:32 PM.****between Planet T and these ten schools go far afield from anything tangentially related to the
breach of contract, tortious interference or misappropriation of trade secrets allegations at issue
in this action. For the reasons that follow, the Subpoenas should be quashed,
Specific Objections to Subpoena Requests
1. All written contracts with Planet T regarding student uniforms.
Objection: Planet T objects to this request on the basis of relevancy. Planet T has a client
relationship with most of the ten schools that Defendant seeks to Subpoena, however, none of
them concern Franklin Academy Charter School or the allegations contained in Plaintiff's Third
Amended Complaint. Defendant seeks every contract Planet T has had with these schools over a
four-year period presumably to compare the terms of Planet T’s contract with Franklin Academy
and that of other schools. This Court has repeatedly quashed discovery orders permitting
discovery on unrelated contracts with other clients because they were not related to any pending
claims or defenses. Here, Franklin Academy seeks to unnecessarily pry into the private affairs of
Planet T and these schools with whom Planet T has had a positive business and philanthropic
relationship. Franklin Academy seeks to poison the well and Planet T’s business relationship
with these schools by seeking each of their uniforms contracts with Plaintiff although said
contracts are not at issue in this case. Planet T objects to the Request because it is designed to
accomplish no other purpose than to harass Planet T and its clients, and to attempt to gain an
unfair competitive advantage by discovering the contracts and business terms between Planet T
and these schools which contracts and business terms Defendant would not be entitled to be
informed of absent this Subpoena, which has no reasonable relationship to the claims and
defenses of this action.See Heinrich Gordon Batchelder Hargrove Weihe & Gent v. Kapner, 605 So. 2d 1319, 1319
(Fla. 4th DCA 1992) (quashing discovery order permitting inspection of records pertaining to
other clients); Kobi Karp Architecture & Interior Design, Inc. v. Charms 63 Nobe, LLC, 166 So.
3d 916, 920-21 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015) (quashing discovery order permitting discovery for records
of defendant’s other customers on other projects, even where plaintiff asserted that the
documents from the other customers would be probative of services to be provided under
contract between plaintiff and defendant); Richard Mulholland & Assoc. v. Polverari, 698 So. 2d
1269, 1270 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (quashing discovery order permitting discovery of retention
contracts with other clients in negligence case, finding “the representation agreements between
petitioners and their other clients are not related to any pending claim or defense, nor was the
information shown to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence”);
Inrecon vy. Vill. Homes at Country Walk, 644 So. 2d 103, 104-05 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (quashing
discovery order permitting discovery on three other unrelated projects, finding that “there is no
basis for ordering production of its confidential financial data . . . regarding work which it
performed for other customers wholly independent of Country Walk,” and stating “‘The rule that
allows a party to request production of its opponent’s records ‘is in no sense designed to afford a
litigant an avenue to pry into his adversary’s business or go on a fishing expedition to uncover
business methods, confidential relations, or other facts pertaining to the business.””) (quoting
Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Balkany, 564 So. 2d 580, 581 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)).
2. All documents and communications regarding the alleged delay and/or alleged
failure of Planet T to pay the revenue contribution/rebate relating to the sale of student uniforms.
Objection: Planet T objects on the basis of relevancy and harassing. Once again, Franklin
Academy seeks to poison the well by specifically requesting documents and communicationsregarding any alleged failures on the part of Planet T to abide by its contractual obligations with
other schools. Planet T’s performance under its contracts with ten different schools have nothing
to do with the instant action or its performance under its contract with Franklin Academy.
Defendant seeks to harm Planet T’s reputation with these clients by requiring them to produce
documents related to Planet T’s alleged failures to pay revenue contributions under contracts that
are not at issue or relevant in this action. The request has the potential of causing irreparable
harm to Planet T who does not have a “revenue contribution” provision with all ten schools. The
request, which carries with it negative connotations, has the potential of interfering with Planet
T’s business relationships and causing unnecessary hostility between Planet T and its clients. See
Ferrandino v. Riley, -- So. 3d --, 2018 WL 493214, at *1 (Fla. Ist DCA Jan. 22, 2018) (affirming
order quashing non-party subpoena where subpoena subjected non-party to oppressive burden
and was harassing); Grooms v. Distinctive Cabinet Designs, Inc., 846 So. 2d 652, 654 (Fla. 2d
DCA 2003) (quashing discovery order permitting discovery of defendant’s other contracts with
third parties, thereby “exposing all of the financial arrangements he has made with customers”);
Sugarmill Woods Civic Ass’n v. Southern States Utilities, 687 So. 2d 1346, 1349 (Fla. Ist DCA
1997) (affirming order quashing subpoenas, stating that the trial court has discretion “to prevent
discovery which it believes is a mere fishing expedition calculated for harassment”).
3. All student uniform sales reports and spreadsheets sent to you by Planet T.
Objection: Planet T objects to this request on the basis of relevancy. Planet T has a client
relationship with most of the ten schools that Defendant seeks to Subpoena, however, none of
them concern Franklin Academy Charter School or the allegations contained in Plaintiff's Third
Amended Complaint. Defendant seeks student uniforms sales reports and spreadsheets for each
of these schools over a four-year period. The uniform orders between Planet T and its otherclients have nothing to do with the uniform orders at issue in this case. Additionally, the sales
reports and spreadsheets have the potential of including confidential student information that
requires additional protection and the production of which would cause irreparable harm.
Planet T also objects to the Request because it is designed to accomplish no other purpose than
to harass Planet T and its clients, and to attempt to gain an unfair competitive advantage by
discovering the sales reports for Planet T and these schools which contracts and sales reports
Defendant would not be entitled to be informed of absent this Subpoena, which has no
reasonable relationship to the claims and defenses of this action.
Planet T also objects to the Request as unduly burdensome. Given the broad scope of the
Request, it would undoubtedly place an undue burden upon the schools, requiring an
unwarranted and unjustified expense in collecting and producing responsive documents.
4. The emails and/or cover letters enclosing the reports and spreadsheets produced in
response to No. 3 above.
Objection: Planet T objects to this request on the basis of relevancy. Planet T has a client
relationship with most of the ten schools that Defendants seeks to Subpoena, however, none of
them concern Franklin Academy Charter School or the allegations contained in Plaintiff's Third
Amended Complaint. Defendant seeks all e-mails and communications related to uniforms sales
reports and spreadsheets for each of these schools over a four-year period. The uniform orders
and any emails between school officials and Planet T have nothing to do with the instant action.
Additionally, the sales reports, spreadsheets and emails have the potential of including
confidential student information that requires additional protection and the production of which
would cause irreparable harm.Franklin Academy seeks to poison the well and Planet T’s business relationship with these
schools by seeking their internal emails with Plaintiff related to their uniform sales. Planet T
objects to the Request because it is designed to accomplish no other purpose than to harass
Planet T and its clients, and to attempt to gain an unfair competitive advantage by discovering
the contracts and business terms between Planet T and these schools which contracts and
business terms Defendant would not be entitled to be informed of absent this Subpoena, which
has no reasonable relationship to the claims and defenses of this action.
Planet T also objects to the Request as unduly burdensome. Given the broad scope of the
Request, it would undoubtedly place an undue burden upon the schools, requiring an
unwarranted and unjustified expense in collecting and producing responsive documents.
5. All documents and communications from Planet T advising that any or all of the
information it provided to you was a trade secret.
Objection: Planet T objects to this request on the basis of relevancy. Planet T has a client
relationship with most of the ten schools that Defendants seeks to Subpoena, however, none of
them concern Franklin Academy Charter School or the allegations contained in Plaintiff's Third
Amended Complaint. Defendant seeks all documents and communications in a four-year span
where Planet T advised its client that the information they are providing is a trade secret. None of
this information is relevant to the trade secrets and confidential business information at issue in
this case and which are unique to this case.
Franklin Academy seeks to poison the well and Planet T’s business relationship with these
schools by seeking their internal emails with Plaintiff related to their business. Planet T objects
to the Request because it is designed to accomplish no other purpose than to harass Planet T andits clients, and to attempt to gain an unfair competitive advantage by discovering the uniform
specifications and other order details between Planet T and these schools which Defendant
would not be entitled to be informed of absent this Subpoena, which has no reasonable
relationship to the claims and defenses of this action.
Planet T also objects to the Request as unduly burdensome. Given the broad scope of the
Request, it would undoubtedly place an undue burden upon the schools, requiring an
unwarranted and unjustified expense in collecting and producing responsive documents.
6. All documents and communications between you and Planet T that contain the
word “trade secret.”
Objection: Planet T objects to this request on the basis of relevancy. Planet T has a client
relationship with most of the ten schools that Defendants seeks to Subpoena, however, none of
them concern Franklin Academy Charter School or the allegations contained in Plaintiff's Third
Amended Complaint. Defendant seeks all documents and communications in a four-year span
where Planet T advised its client that the information they are providing is specifically marked a
“trade secret.” None of this information is relevant to the trade secrets and confidential business
information at issue in this case and which are unique to this case.
Franklin Academy seeks to poison the well and Planet T’s business relationship with these
schools by seeking their internal emails with Plaintiff related to their business. Planet T objects
to the Request because it is designed to accomplish no other purpose than to harass Planet T and
its clients, and to attempt to gain an unfair competitive advantage by discovering the uniform
specifications and other order details between Planet T and these schools which Defendantwould not be entitled to be informed of absent this Subpoena, which has no reasonable
relationship to the claims and defenses of this action.
Planet T also objects to the Request as unduly burdensome. Given the broad scope of the
Request, it would undoubtedly place an undue burden upon the schools, requiring an
unwarranted and unjustified expense in collecting and producing responsive documents.
7. All documents and communications from Planet T advising that any or all of the
information it provided to you is exempt from disclosure under Chapter 119, Florida Statutes.
Objection: Planet T objects to this request on the basis of relevancy. Planet T has a client
relationship with most of the ten schools that Defendants seeks to Subpoena, however, none of
them concern Franklin Academy Charter School or the allegations contained in Plaintiff's Third
Amended Complaint. Defendant seeks all documents and communications in a four-year span
where Planet T advised its client that the information they are providing is specifically marked a
as exempt under “Chapter 119, Florida Statutes.” None of this information is relevant to the trade
secrets and confidential business information at issue in this case and which are unique to this
case.
Franklin Academy seeks to poison the well and Planet T’s business relationship with these
schools by seeking their internal emails with Plaintiff related to their business. Planet T objects
to the Request because it is designed to accomplish no other purpose than to harass Planet T and
its clients, and to attempt to gain an unfair competitive advantage by discovering the uniform
specifications and other order details between Planet T and these schools which Defendant
would not be entitled to be informed of absent this Subpoena, which has no reasonable
relationship to the claims and defenses of this action.Planet T also objects to the Request as unduly burdensome. Given the broad scope of the
Request, it would undoubtedly place an undue burden upon the schools, requiring an
unwarranted and unjustified expense in collecting and producing responsive documents.
8. All documents and communications from Planet T that contain a notice to
unintended recipients.
Objection: — Planet T objects to this request on the basis of relevancy and ambiguity. Planet T
has a client relationship with most of the ten schools that Defendants seeks to Subpoena,
however, none of them concern Franklin Academy Charter School or the allegations contained in
Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint. Defendant seeks all documents and communications in a
four-year span containing a “notice of unintended recipients.” None of this information is
relevant to the trade secrets and confidential business information at issue in this case and which
are unique to this case. Also, it is unclear what is meant by “a notice to unintended recipients.”
Franklin Academy seeks to poison the well and Planet T’s business relationship with these
schools by seeking their internal emails with Plaintiff related to their business. Planet T objects
to the Request because it is designed to accomplish no other purpose than to harass Planet T and
its clients, and to attempt to gain an unfair competitive advantage by discovering the uniform
specifications and other order details between Planet T and these schools which Defendant
would not be entitled to be informed of absent this Subpoena, which has no reasonable
relationship to the claims and defenses of this action.
Planet T also objects to the Request as unduly burdensome. Given the broad scope of the
Request, it would undoubtedly place an undue burden upon the schools, requiring anunwarranted and unjustified expense in collecting and producing responsive documents.
DATED 9" day of September 2018.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing has been furnished via Email
through the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal to the service list below on September 9, 2018.
Respectfully Submitted,
DI PIETRO PARTNERS, LLP
901 E. Las Olas Blvd., Suite 202
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Primary: service@ddpalaw.com
Secondary: paralegal@ddpalaw.com
Telephone: (954) 712-3070
Facsimile: (954) 337-3824
/s/ Rodolfo Mayor
DAVID DI PIETRO, ESQ.
Florida Bar No.: 10370
david@ddpalaw.com
NICOLE MARTELL, ESQ.
Florida Bar No.: 100172
nicole@ddpalaw.com
RODOLFO MAYOR, ESQ.
Florida Bar No.: 111647
rudy@ddpalaw.com
SERVICE LIST
Christopher M. David, Esq.
FUERST ITTLEMAN DAVID & JOSEPH, PL
1001 Brickell Bay Drive, 32" Floor
Miami, Florida 33131
Emails: cdavid@fuerstlaw.com; tdavid@fuerstlaw.com;
and dmuller@fuerstlaw.com
John L. McManus, Esq.
GREENBERG TRAURIG, P.A.
401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 2000
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301
Emails: horkyk@gtlaw.com;flservice@gtlaw.com; muehlfeldern@gtlaw.com
memanusj@gtlaw.com; brownc@gtlaw.com; yeargina@gtlaw.com
Preview
Filing # 77626317 E-Filed 09/09/2018 06:24:33 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 17'™ JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY FLORIDA CASE NO.: CACE-14-001087(04) PLANET T UNIFORMS, INC., Plaintiff, v. FLORIDA CHARTER FOUNDATION, INC. D/B/A FRANKLIN ACADEMY CHARTER SCHOOL, DISCOVERY SCHOOLS, _ INC., iUNIFORMS, INC., RICHARD SHELLOW, JON THOMAS ROGERS, AND SCOTT SZNITKEN, Defendants. / PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTION TO FLORIDA CHARTER FOUNDATION, INC.’S NOTICE OF INTENT TO SERVE SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM WITHOUT DEPOSITION COMES NOW Plaintiff, PLANET T UNIFORMS, INC. (“Plaintiff”), by and through the undersigned counsel, pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.351(b), hereby files this Objection to Defendant, FLORIDA CHARTER FOUNDATION, INC.’s Notice of Intent to Serve Subpoena Duces Tecum Without Deposition, directed to (i) Indian Ridge Middle School (ii) Nova — Dwight D. Eisenhower (iii) Pines Charter Middle School (iv) Pines Charter High School (v) Cooper City Elementary (vi) Pioneer Middle School (vii) Pines Middle School (viii) Pembroke Pines Elementary (ix) Somerset Prep Middle & High School (x) Somerset Prep Elementary, and in support states as follows: Defendant seeks to issue Subpoenas directed at ten different schools aimed at accomplishing no other purpose than to harass Planet T and its educational clients in the area. Defendant’s request for contracts, communications, uniform sales reports and spreadsheets *4* FILED: BROWARD COUNTY, FL BRENDA D. FORMAN, CLERK 9/9/2018 6:24:32 PM.****between Planet T and these ten schools go far afield from anything tangentially related to the breach of contract, tortious interference or misappropriation of trade secrets allegations at issue in this action. For the reasons that follow, the Subpoenas should be quashed, Specific Objections to Subpoena Requests 1. All written contracts with Planet T regarding student uniforms. Objection: Planet T objects to this request on the basis of relevancy. Planet T has a client relationship with most of the ten schools that Defendant seeks to Subpoena, however, none of them concern Franklin Academy Charter School or the allegations contained in Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint. Defendant seeks every contract Planet T has had with these schools over a four-year period presumably to compare the terms of Planet T’s contract with Franklin Academy and that of other schools. This Court has repeatedly quashed discovery orders permitting discovery on unrelated contracts with other clients because they were not related to any pending claims or defenses. Here, Franklin Academy seeks to unnecessarily pry into the private affairs of Planet T and these schools with whom Planet T has had a positive business and philanthropic relationship. Franklin Academy seeks to poison the well and Planet T’s business relationship with these schools by seeking each of their uniforms contracts with Plaintiff although said contracts are not at issue in this case. Planet T objects to the Request because it is designed to accomplish no other purpose than to harass Planet T and its clients, and to attempt to gain an unfair competitive advantage by discovering the contracts and business terms between Planet T and these schools which contracts and business terms Defendant would not be entitled to be informed of absent this Subpoena, which has no reasonable relationship to the claims and defenses of this action.See Heinrich Gordon Batchelder Hargrove Weihe & Gent v. Kapner, 605 So. 2d 1319, 1319 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992) (quashing discovery order permitting inspection of records pertaining to other clients); Kobi Karp Architecture & Interior Design, Inc. v. Charms 63 Nobe, LLC, 166 So. 3d 916, 920-21 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015) (quashing discovery order permitting discovery for records of defendant’s other customers on other projects, even where plaintiff asserted that the documents from the other customers would be probative of services to be provided under contract between plaintiff and defendant); Richard Mulholland & Assoc. v. Polverari, 698 So. 2d 1269, 1270 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (quashing discovery order permitting discovery of retention contracts with other clients in negligence case, finding “the representation agreements between petitioners and their other clients are not related to any pending claim or defense, nor was the information shown to be reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence”); Inrecon vy. Vill. Homes at Country Walk, 644 So. 2d 103, 104-05 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (quashing discovery order permitting discovery on three other unrelated projects, finding that “there is no basis for ordering production of its confidential financial data . . . regarding work which it performed for other customers wholly independent of Country Walk,” and stating “‘The rule that allows a party to request production of its opponent’s records ‘is in no sense designed to afford a litigant an avenue to pry into his adversary’s business or go on a fishing expedition to uncover business methods, confidential relations, or other facts pertaining to the business.””) (quoting Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Balkany, 564 So. 2d 580, 581 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)). 2. All documents and communications regarding the alleged delay and/or alleged failure of Planet T to pay the revenue contribution/rebate relating to the sale of student uniforms. Objection: Planet T objects on the basis of relevancy and harassing. Once again, Franklin Academy seeks to poison the well by specifically requesting documents and communicationsregarding any alleged failures on the part of Planet T to abide by its contractual obligations with other schools. Planet T’s performance under its contracts with ten different schools have nothing to do with the instant action or its performance under its contract with Franklin Academy. Defendant seeks to harm Planet T’s reputation with these clients by requiring them to produce documents related to Planet T’s alleged failures to pay revenue contributions under contracts that are not at issue or relevant in this action. The request has the potential of causing irreparable harm to Planet T who does not have a “revenue contribution” provision with all ten schools. The request, which carries with it negative connotations, has the potential of interfering with Planet T’s business relationships and causing unnecessary hostility between Planet T and its clients. See Ferrandino v. Riley, -- So. 3d --, 2018 WL 493214, at *1 (Fla. Ist DCA Jan. 22, 2018) (affirming order quashing non-party subpoena where subpoena subjected non-party to oppressive burden and was harassing); Grooms v. Distinctive Cabinet Designs, Inc., 846 So. 2d 652, 654 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (quashing discovery order permitting discovery of defendant’s other contracts with third parties, thereby “exposing all of the financial arrangements he has made with customers”); Sugarmill Woods Civic Ass’n v. Southern States Utilities, 687 So. 2d 1346, 1349 (Fla. Ist DCA 1997) (affirming order quashing subpoenas, stating that the trial court has discretion “to prevent discovery which it believes is a mere fishing expedition calculated for harassment”). 3. All student uniform sales reports and spreadsheets sent to you by Planet T. Objection: Planet T objects to this request on the basis of relevancy. Planet T has a client relationship with most of the ten schools that Defendant seeks to Subpoena, however, none of them concern Franklin Academy Charter School or the allegations contained in Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint. Defendant seeks student uniforms sales reports and spreadsheets for each of these schools over a four-year period. The uniform orders between Planet T and its otherclients have nothing to do with the uniform orders at issue in this case. Additionally, the sales reports and spreadsheets have the potential of including confidential student information that requires additional protection and the production of which would cause irreparable harm. Planet T also objects to the Request because it is designed to accomplish no other purpose than to harass Planet T and its clients, and to attempt to gain an unfair competitive advantage by discovering the sales reports for Planet T and these schools which contracts and sales reports Defendant would not be entitled to be informed of absent this Subpoena, which has no reasonable relationship to the claims and defenses of this action. Planet T also objects to the Request as unduly burdensome. Given the broad scope of the Request, it would undoubtedly place an undue burden upon the schools, requiring an unwarranted and unjustified expense in collecting and producing responsive documents. 4. The emails and/or cover letters enclosing the reports and spreadsheets produced in response to No. 3 above. Objection: Planet T objects to this request on the basis of relevancy. Planet T has a client relationship with most of the ten schools that Defendants seeks to Subpoena, however, none of them concern Franklin Academy Charter School or the allegations contained in Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint. Defendant seeks all e-mails and communications related to uniforms sales reports and spreadsheets for each of these schools over a four-year period. The uniform orders and any emails between school officials and Planet T have nothing to do with the instant action. Additionally, the sales reports, spreadsheets and emails have the potential of including confidential student information that requires additional protection and the production of which would cause irreparable harm.Franklin Academy seeks to poison the well and Planet T’s business relationship with these schools by seeking their internal emails with Plaintiff related to their uniform sales. Planet T objects to the Request because it is designed to accomplish no other purpose than to harass Planet T and its clients, and to attempt to gain an unfair competitive advantage by discovering the contracts and business terms between Planet T and these schools which contracts and business terms Defendant would not be entitled to be informed of absent this Subpoena, which has no reasonable relationship to the claims and defenses of this action. Planet T also objects to the Request as unduly burdensome. Given the broad scope of the Request, it would undoubtedly place an undue burden upon the schools, requiring an unwarranted and unjustified expense in collecting and producing responsive documents. 5. All documents and communications from Planet T advising that any or all of the information it provided to you was a trade secret. Objection: Planet T objects to this request on the basis of relevancy. Planet T has a client relationship with most of the ten schools that Defendants seeks to Subpoena, however, none of them concern Franklin Academy Charter School or the allegations contained in Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint. Defendant seeks all documents and communications in a four-year span where Planet T advised its client that the information they are providing is a trade secret. None of this information is relevant to the trade secrets and confidential business information at issue in this case and which are unique to this case. Franklin Academy seeks to poison the well and Planet T’s business relationship with these schools by seeking their internal emails with Plaintiff related to their business. Planet T objects to the Request because it is designed to accomplish no other purpose than to harass Planet T andits clients, and to attempt to gain an unfair competitive advantage by discovering the uniform specifications and other order details between Planet T and these schools which Defendant would not be entitled to be informed of absent this Subpoena, which has no reasonable relationship to the claims and defenses of this action. Planet T also objects to the Request as unduly burdensome. Given the broad scope of the Request, it would undoubtedly place an undue burden upon the schools, requiring an unwarranted and unjustified expense in collecting and producing responsive documents. 6. All documents and communications between you and Planet T that contain the word “trade secret.” Objection: Planet T objects to this request on the basis of relevancy. Planet T has a client relationship with most of the ten schools that Defendants seeks to Subpoena, however, none of them concern Franklin Academy Charter School or the allegations contained in Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint. Defendant seeks all documents and communications in a four-year span where Planet T advised its client that the information they are providing is specifically marked a “trade secret.” None of this information is relevant to the trade secrets and confidential business information at issue in this case and which are unique to this case. Franklin Academy seeks to poison the well and Planet T’s business relationship with these schools by seeking their internal emails with Plaintiff related to their business. Planet T objects to the Request because it is designed to accomplish no other purpose than to harass Planet T and its clients, and to attempt to gain an unfair competitive advantage by discovering the uniform specifications and other order details between Planet T and these schools which Defendantwould not be entitled to be informed of absent this Subpoena, which has no reasonable relationship to the claims and defenses of this action. Planet T also objects to the Request as unduly burdensome. Given the broad scope of the Request, it would undoubtedly place an undue burden upon the schools, requiring an unwarranted and unjustified expense in collecting and producing responsive documents. 7. All documents and communications from Planet T advising that any or all of the information it provided to you is exempt from disclosure under Chapter 119, Florida Statutes. Objection: Planet T objects to this request on the basis of relevancy. Planet T has a client relationship with most of the ten schools that Defendants seeks to Subpoena, however, none of them concern Franklin Academy Charter School or the allegations contained in Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint. Defendant seeks all documents and communications in a four-year span where Planet T advised its client that the information they are providing is specifically marked a as exempt under “Chapter 119, Florida Statutes.” None of this information is relevant to the trade secrets and confidential business information at issue in this case and which are unique to this case. Franklin Academy seeks to poison the well and Planet T’s business relationship with these schools by seeking their internal emails with Plaintiff related to their business. Planet T objects to the Request because it is designed to accomplish no other purpose than to harass Planet T and its clients, and to attempt to gain an unfair competitive advantage by discovering the uniform specifications and other order details between Planet T and these schools which Defendant would not be entitled to be informed of absent this Subpoena, which has no reasonable relationship to the claims and defenses of this action.Planet T also objects to the Request as unduly burdensome. Given the broad scope of the Request, it would undoubtedly place an undue burden upon the schools, requiring an unwarranted and unjustified expense in collecting and producing responsive documents. 8. All documents and communications from Planet T that contain a notice to unintended recipients. Objection: — Planet T objects to this request on the basis of relevancy and ambiguity. Planet T has a client relationship with most of the ten schools that Defendants seeks to Subpoena, however, none of them concern Franklin Academy Charter School or the allegations contained in Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint. Defendant seeks all documents and communications in a four-year span containing a “notice of unintended recipients.” None of this information is relevant to the trade secrets and confidential business information at issue in this case and which are unique to this case. Also, it is unclear what is meant by “a notice to unintended recipients.” Franklin Academy seeks to poison the well and Planet T’s business relationship with these schools by seeking their internal emails with Plaintiff related to their business. Planet T objects to the Request because it is designed to accomplish no other purpose than to harass Planet T and its clients, and to attempt to gain an unfair competitive advantage by discovering the uniform specifications and other order details between Planet T and these schools which Defendant would not be entitled to be informed of absent this Subpoena, which has no reasonable relationship to the claims and defenses of this action. Planet T also objects to the Request as unduly burdensome. Given the broad scope of the Request, it would undoubtedly place an undue burden upon the schools, requiring anunwarranted and unjustified expense in collecting and producing responsive documents. DATED 9" day of September 2018. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing has been furnished via Email through the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal to the service list below on September 9, 2018. Respectfully Submitted, DI PIETRO PARTNERS, LLP 901 E. Las Olas Blvd., Suite 202 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Primary: service@ddpalaw.com Secondary: paralegal@ddpalaw.com Telephone: (954) 712-3070 Facsimile: (954) 337-3824 /s/ Rodolfo Mayor DAVID DI PIETRO, ESQ. Florida Bar No.: 10370 david@ddpalaw.com NICOLE MARTELL, ESQ. Florida Bar No.: 100172 nicole@ddpalaw.com RODOLFO MAYOR, ESQ. Florida Bar No.: 111647 rudy@ddpalaw.com SERVICE LIST Christopher M. David, Esq. FUERST ITTLEMAN DAVID & JOSEPH, PL 1001 Brickell Bay Drive, 32" Floor Miami, Florida 33131 Emails: cdavid@fuerstlaw.com; tdavid@fuerstlaw.com; and dmuller@fuerstlaw.com John L. McManus, Esq. GREENBERG TRAURIG, P.A. 401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 2000 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Emails: horkyk@gtlaw.com;flservice@gtlaw.com; muehlfeldern@gtlaw.com memanusj@gtlaw.com; brownc@gtlaw.com; yeargina@gtlaw.com