Rodriguez

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 ANIBAL RODRIGUEZ, et al., Case No. 20-cv-04688-RS (AGT)

Plaintiffs,

ORDER RE: DISCOVERY DISPUTE

v. 9 Re: Dkt. No. 110 GOOGLE LLC, Defendant.

Plaintiffs have moved to compel Google to provide one or more 30(b)(6) witnesses to testify on six topics. The undersigned has considered the parties’ respective positions and rules as follows: 1. Topics 1–3 are premature. Google hasn’t finished producing topic-related documents, so a 30(b)(6) deposition at this time would be inefficient. Plaintiffs may re-notice these topics after Google substantially completes production of the topic-related documents. 2. Topic 2 appears to relate to plaintiffs’ “secret scripts” theory. Judge Seeborg recently held that that theory was “woefully underdeveloped” in the then-operative complaint. Dkt. 109 at 12. Google, on that basis, argues that Topic 2 is moot. Judge Seeborg gave plaintiffs leave to amend their complaint, and plaintiffs suggest that they will be taking that opportunity to…