United States District Court, N.D. Iowa, Western Division
For Shawn Kampfe, Plaintiff: Jennifer Lynn Turco Meyer, Raymond R Aranza, LEAD ATTORNEYS, Marks Clare & Richards, LLC, Omaha, NE USA.
For Petsmart, Inc, a Delaware Corporation, Defendant: Kelly Ann Moffitt, Patrick Robert Martin, LEAD ATTORNEYS, Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, PC, Minneapolis, MN USA.
For Matthew Boos, Defendant: George R Wood, LEAD ATTORNEY, Littler Mendelson, Minneapolis, MN USA; Andrew James Voss, PRO HAC VICE, Littler Mendelson, PC, Minneapolis, MN USA.
LEONARD T. STRAND,
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
Plaintiff Shawn Kampfe has filed a motion (Doc. No. 19) to quash and for protective order. Defendant PetSmart, Inc. (PetSmart) has filed a resistance (Doc. No. 20). Kampfe did not file a reply. No party has requested oral argument. The motion is fully submitted.
II. RELEVANT BACKGROUND
Kampfe filed this action on February 28, 2014, against PetSmart and Matthew Boos. Her complaint, as amended (Doc. No. 3), alleges that she was hired by PetSmart on June 5, 2005, to be the presentation manager at its Eagan, Minnesota store. She alleges that she was transferred to PetSmart's Sioux City store in September 2005 and that she was promoted to the position of operations manager of that store in December 2006. She further alleges that Boos was the store manager and her direct supervisor.
Kampfe contends Boos subjected her to sexual harassment, inappropriate touching and sexual comments. She further contends that she reported this harassment to the human resources department and to certain PetSmart managers. She alleges that after her complaints were investigated and substantiated, Boos retaliated against her by escalating his harassment and subjecting her to heightened scrutiny and unfair treatment. She describes additional complaints to upper management, which she claims were not investigated or acted upon properly, and continued harassment and retaliatory conduct by Boos. Doc. No. 3 at ¶ ¶ 14-18. Kampfe alleges she was discharged soon after she filed a complaint with the Sioux City Human Rights Commission. She asserts claims of hostile work environment and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Iowa Civil Rights Act, as well as a claim of failure to pay overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The defendants filed an answer (Doc. No. 6) in which they deny Kampfe's operative allegations, deny liability and assert various affirmative defenses. They contend Kampfe was suspended, and subsequently discharged, because of complaints relating to her conduct and not, as she claims, for retaliatory purposes. They further assert that Kampfe was not entitled to overtime pay because, as operations manager, she was properly classified as an exempt employee.
On August 8, 2014, PetSmart served discovery on Kampfe requesting, in part, information relating to Kampfe's current and former employers and asking for signed records-release authorizations. Kampfe did not provide signed authorizations. However, after various communications between counsel, Kampfe provided signed authorizations for two of her three former employers. She did not provide an authorization for Sears, a former employer, or Fimco, her current employer.
On December 15, 2014, PetSmart served a Notice of Subpoenas that included proposed subpoenas to Sears and Fimco. The Notice indicated that PetSmart would be demanding productions of three types of documents for the period between September 1999 and February 2005:
A. Personnel Records. Any and all personnel records, including but not limited to starting and ending dates of employment, applications, resumes, job descriptions, performance evaluations, disciplinary ...