Waymo LLC v. Uber Technologies, Inc. et al

Filing 1508

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley granting in part and denying in part #1438 Otto Trucking's Motion to Compel Depositions of Nathaniel Fairfield, Leah Bijnens, John Krafcik, and Andrew Barton Sweeney (ahm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/11/2017)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6

7

WAYMO LLC,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Case No.17-cv-00939-WHA (JSC)
ORDER RE: OTTO TRUCKING’S
MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITIONS

v.
UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al.,

Re: Dkt. No. 1438

Defendants.

12
13

Otto Trucking seeks to compel depositions of four Waymo employees related to their

14

knowledge of Mr. Levandowski’s involvement with Odin Wave and Tyto. (Dkt. No. 1438.)

15

Waymo objects on the grounds that it has not waived its attorney work-product privilege as to the

16

investigation conducted by its security team (the “Security Investigation.”). Otto Trucking’s

17

motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.

18

The Court agrees that Waymo has not waived the privilege as to its Security Investigation.

19

That does not mean, however, that it can shield from discovery witnesses who have percipient

20

knowledge of Mr. Levandowski’s involvement in side businesses just because the witnesses were

21

discovered during the investigation. From the record it appears that Andrew Barton-Sweeney has

22

percipient knowledge of these entities and/or Mr. Levandowski’s alleged side businesses, that is,

23

knowledge acquired separate and apart from any Security Investigation. If so, Waymo shall make

24

him available for a deposition, not to exceed two hours, and limited solely to his knowledge of

25

Odin Wave, Tyto, and any other side businesses engaged in by Mr. Levandowski. Waymo’s

26

opposition does not address this witness, or Nathaniel Fairfield, discussed below.

27
28

Nathaniel Fairfield appears to have obtained his knowledge from current Uber employee
Gaeten Pennecot. However, the record suggests that Mr. Fairfield may have additional

1

information regarding Odin Wave. Accordingly, Otto Trucking may take his deposition with the

2

same limitations as apply to Mr. Barton-Sweeney.

3

As Mr. Krafcik and Ms. Bijnens do not appear to have knowledge separate from that

4

acquired during the privileged investigation, Otto Trucking’s motion to compel their further

5

depositions is denied.

6

7

Mr. Levandowski’s involvement with side businesses is at issue in this lawsuit; indeed,
Waymo previously moved to compel documents regarding Tyto and Odin Wave.

8

The depositions shall occur on or before September 15, 2017.

9

This Order disposes of Docket No. 1438.

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: September 11, 2017

12
13
JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY
United States Magistrate Judge

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2