Lamartina
Lamartina v. VMware, Inc.
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SAN JOSE DIVISION 7 8 WILLIAM LAMARTINA, Case No. 20-cv-02182-EJD (VKD)
9 Plaintiff,
ORDER RE DECEMBER 19, 2023
10 v. DISCOVERY DISPUTE RE VMWARE'S RULE 30(B)(6) 11 VMWARE, INC., et al., DEPOSITION 12 Defendants. Re: Dkt. No. 115
13 14 The parties ask the Court to resolve a dispute concerning the timing of plaintiff’s Rule 15 30(b)(6) deposition of defendant VMWare, Inc. (“VMWare”). Dkt. Nos. 115, 119. Plaintiff 16 argues that VMWare should be required to produce witnesses to testify on its behalf now. 17 VMWare responds that it should not be required to provide testimony before the parties brief, and 18 the Court resolves, an earlier dispute concerning plaintiff’s contention that VMWare waived 19 privilege and work product protections for certain materials. The Court finds this dispute suitable 20 for resolution without oral argument. Civil L.R. 7-1(b). 21 Plaintiff’s Rule 30(b)(6) deposition notice…