Interwoven, Inc. v. Vertical Computer Systems, Inc.

Filing 232

Discovery Order re: 228 Joint Letter. Signed by Judge Joseph C. Spero on December 20, 2013. (jcslc3S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/20/2013)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

INTERWOVEN, INC.,

Case No. 10-cv-04645-RS (JCS)

Plaintiff,
8
v.

DISCOVERY ORDER

9
10

VERTICAL COMPUTER SYSTEMS, INC.,

Re: Dkt. No. 228

Defendant.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

On December 19, 2013, the Court held a hearing regarding the joint discovery letter filed

14

on December 12, 2013. See Dkt. No. 228. For the reasons stated below and on the record at the

15

hearing, the Court denies Defendant’s request to re-open discovery to take the deposition of non-

16

party Frank Livaudais (“Livaudais”).

17

Defendant knew or should have known of Livaudais’ existence since at least October 2011

18

when Plaintiff produced documents containing Livaudais’ name. Indeed, Defendant used such

19

documents in a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition in November 2012. Additionally, Defendant disclosed—

20

and therefore indicated its knowledge of—the significance of Livaudais in its June 2013

21

opposition to Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. Despite this knowledge, Defendant waited

22

until nearly a year after the close of discovery to move for the deposition of Livaudais. This

23

indicates a lack of diligence. Moreover, the information sought by Defendant was directly

24

available from the inventor, with whom Defendant’s counsel has had a relationship since 2007.

25

The Court notes that Defendant improperly ignored the clear orders of this Court and the

26

District Court by making a motion before the District Court Judge regarding this discovery

27

dispute. The Court also notes that the proper procedure for raising any objections to Plaintiff’s

28

alleged failure to properly disclose Livaudais under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Local Rules would have been to bring a timely motion before this Court.
Accordingly, the Court DENIES Defendant’s request to re-open discovery to take the
deposition of Livaudais.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 20, 2013
______________________________________
JOSEPH C. SPERO
United States Magistrate Judge

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2