Keller v. Electronic Arts Inc. et al

Filing 987

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL DEPOSITIONS #973 . Signed by Judge Nathanael Cousins on 2/10/14. (lmh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/10/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

12
IN RE NCAA STUDENT-ATHLETE NAME

Case No. 09-cv-01967 CW (NC)

LITIGATION

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND
DENYING IN PART REQUEST
FOR ADDITIONAL DEPOSITIONS

13 AND LIKENESS LICENSING
14
15

Re: Dkt. No. 973

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

The NCAA moves to compel additional depositions of the named Antitrust Plaintiffs,
excluding those plaintiffs newly named in the Third Consolidated Amended Complaint.
The NCAA argues that because Antitrust Plaintiffs added a new theory of liability near the
close of discovery, the additional depositions are necessary. Having balanced the NCAA’s
need for the additional discovery against the burden to the Antitrust Plaintiffs, the Court
grants in part and denies in part the NCAA’s motion.
The NCAA may depose Damien Rhodes, Patrick Maynor, and Tyrone Prothro for
two hours per witness, at a location convenient to the deponent, with the scope of the
deposition limited to the live broadcast theory as described in the parties’ letter brief. See
Dkt. No. 973 at 1. According to Antitrust Plaintiffs, Rhodes, Maynor, and Prothro are the
only Antitrust Plaintiffs who have claims based upon the live broadcast theory. Dkt. No.

28
Case No. 09-cv-01967 CW (NC)
ORDER RE: REQUEST FOR
ADDITIONAL DEPOSITIONS

1 973 at 6. The Court finds that the NCAA has failed to articulate what relevant information
2 it expects to gather from athletes who do not have a claim under the live broadcast theory.
3 The burden to the Antitrust Plaintiffs in deposing these other athletes outweighs the
4 NCAA’s minimal need for the additional testimony. Therefore the NCAA’s request to
5 depose Antitrust Plaintiffs other than Rhodes, Maynor, and Prothro is denied. The NCAA
6 must complete the depositions of Rhodes, Maynor, and Prothro within 28 days of this order,
7 unless the NCAA moves the Court and shows good cause for why a different deadline is
8 necessary.
9

Any party may object to this order within fourteen days. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a).

10

IT IS SO ORDERED.

11

Date: February 10, 2014

12

_________________________
Nathanael M. Cousins
United States Magistrate Judge

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No. 09-cv-01967 CW (NC)
ORDER RE: REQUEST FOR
ADDITIONAL DEPOSITIONS

2