Zeman v. Twitter, Inc. et al

Filing 98

ORDER RE: DECEMBER 13, 2024 DISCOVERY DISPUTEgranting in part and denying in part 97 Discovery Letter Brief. (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 12/18/2024)

1
2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

4
5

JOHN ZEMAN,
Plaintiff,

6
7
8
9

Case No. 23-cv-01786-SI
ORDER RE: DECEMBER 13, 2024
DISCOVERY DISPUTE

v.
TWITTER, INC., et al.,

Re: Dkt. No. 97

Defendants.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

10
11

The Court received a joint brief outlining a discovery dispute in which defendant asked the

12

Court to compel plaintiff to respond to twenty-six requests for production and fourteen

13

interrogatories (jointly, “the requests”). Dkt. No. 97. Defendant first served the requests on August

14

23, 2024. Id. After 30 days had passed, plaintiff asked three separate times for one additional week

15

to respond. Id. Then plaintiff changed his position and asked to postpone responses until after the

16

opt-in period closes on January 21, 2025. Id. The Court orders plaintiff to respond to the requests

17

by January 15, 2025.

18

While plaintiff has not timely objected to the requests, the Court finds good cause to excuse

19

this failure. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(b)(4). Plaintiff’s counsel and defendants are engaged in fluid

20

discovery across dozens of cases involving the same set of events and while plaintiff’s position here

21

was incorrect, it was not unreasonably held. Accordingly, plaintiff’s right to present objections or

22

assert privileges in his responses is not waived.

23
24
25
26
27
28

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 18, 2024
______________________________________
SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge