Postpichal
Postpichal v. Cricket Wireless, LLC
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 JERMAINE THOMAS, et al., Case No. 19-cv-07270-WHA (AGT)
Plaintiffs,
DISCOVERY ORDER REGARDING
v. PLAINTIFFS’ RENEWED MOTION TO
COMPEL
CRICKET WIRELESS, LLC, Re: ECF No. 161 Defendant.
12 This matter is back before the undersigned on plaintiffs’ renewed request to compel defendant Cricket Wireless, LLC to produce its litigation hold letters and related correspondence. ECF No. 161. The Court denied plaintiffs’ previous request (ECF No. 119) without prejudice, leaving open the possibility of a renewed motion following the deposition of Cricket’s Rule 30(b)(6) representative on document retention. ECF No. 135. Plaintiffs, who have now deposed two Cricket witnesses on retention, argue in their renewed motion that neither witness provided relevant answers about the basic details surrounding the hold letters at issue. Having reviewed the parties’ joint letter brief, including the nearly 800 pages of attached deposition testimony, the Court grants…