United States District Court, N.D. California
ORDER RE: WAYMO'S MOTION TO COMPEL Re: Dkt. Nos.
681, 682, 747, 748, 749
JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY United States Magistrate Judge
seeks the production of certain documents and answers to
interrogatories from Uber and Otto Trucking.
Expedited Document Requests
RFP No. 5
objects to producing emails that are responsive to
Waymo's request for diligence documents on the grounds
that such documents are not appropriate for expedited
discovery. However, it also acknowledges that Waymo requested
such documents pursuant to RFP No. 28 in a non-expedited
discovery request and that it responded to such request on
June 23. Uber does not disclose whether it produced such
documents. If it has not, it shall. The documents are
relevant to what information Otto shared with Uber and
therefore are relevant to Waymo's trade secret claims.
RFP No. 8
responsive to Waymo's request for documents regarding
“Pre-Signing Bad Acts” are relevant. Uber
contends that it does not have any non-privileged responsive
documents. To the extent any such documents have not
previously been placed on a privilege log Uber shall do so
now. Uber has not shown that the amount of such documents is
so voluminous that it cannot comply with its well-established
obligation to log documents it is withholding on privilege
RFP No. 10
has agreed to produce all lab notebooks belonging to
personnel who worked on LiDAR.
RFP No. 20
objects on the grounds of relevancy to production of software
modules that were part of the intellectual property
identified in the Put Call Agreement Disclosure Schedules.
The objection is overruled. Otto's intellectual property
disclosed to Uber is discoverable as it is relevant to
Waymo's claims and Uber's defenses.
RFP No. 25
has satisfactorily responded to Waymo's request for