Zeiger

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 DANIEL ZEIGER, Case No. 3:17-cv-04056-WHO

8 Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

9 v. DENYING IN PART MOTION TO

STRIKE ERRATA SHEET CHANGES

10 WELLPET LLC, TO PLAINTIFF’S DEPOSITION

TESTIMONY

Defendant. 11 Re: Dkt. No. 114

12 13 After an emergency brought plaintiff Daniel Zeiger’s deposition to an abrupt pause, he and 14 defendant WellPet, LLC agreed that they would reschedule its completion. Prior to round two, 15 Zeiger submitted an errata sheet that made thirteen changes to his testimony and four 16 clarifications. WellPet moves to strike that errata sheet, arguing that it is an inappropriate vehicle 17 for material alterations and clarifications that could have been made through questioning by 18 plaintiff’s counsel during the course of the second deposition. As set forth below, I find that six of 19 the changes are contradictory; accordingly, I will grant the motion in part. 20 BACKGROUND 21 This case was…