The State Of Texas, et al V Google, LLC

Filing 452

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING 428 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE SPECIAL MASTER. It is ORDERED that the Motion for Protective Order, (Dkt. # 347 ), is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. It is further ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED as to Ms. Garber 9;s deposition. It is further ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED as to the States' written discovery seeking discovery-on-discovery without prejudice to the States later seeking such discovery if justified. It is further ORDERED that the motion is DENIED as to Rule 30(b)(6) testimony on Topics 1 and 18 with respect to Google Chats. It is further ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED as to Rule 30(b)(6) testimony on Topics 2, 3, 4, 5, 16, 17, and 19. It is further ORDERED that Google must condu ct a re-review of those privileged documents identified on its privilege log that mention or refer to Ms. Garber and confirm that such documents, upon counsel of record's review, are not tainted by the alleged "fake privilege." Signed by District Judge Sean D. Jordan on 5/1/2024. (jmb)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION THE STATE OF TEXAS, ET AL. § § § § § v. GOOGLE LLC CIVIL NO. 4:20-CV-957-SDJ MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE SPECIAL MASTER Before the Court is Special Master David Moran’s Report and Recommendation, (Dkt. #428), concerning Google LLC’s (“Google”) Motion for Protective Order, (Dkt. #347), and Memorandum in Support thereof, (Dkt. #361). Plaintiff States oppose the motion. (Dkt. #374). The Court referred the motion to the Special Master on April 12, 2024. (Dkt. #367). The parties did not file any objections. After full consideration, the Report and Recommendation of the Special Master, (Dkt. #428), is ADOPTED. It is ORDERED that the Motion for Protective Order, (Dkt. #347), is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. It is further ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED as to Ms. Garber’s deposition. It is further ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED as to the States’ written discovery seeking discovery-on-discovery without prejudice to the States later seeking such discovery if justified. It is further ORDERED that the motion is DENIED as to Rule 30(b)(6) testimony on Topics 1 and 18 with respect to Google Chats. 1 . It is further ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED as to Rule 30(b)(6) testimony on Topics 2, 3, 4, 5, 16, 17, and 19. It is further ORDERED that Google must conduct a re-review of those privileged documents identified on its privilege log that mention or refer to Ms. Garber and confirm that such documents, upon counsel of record’s review, are not tainted by the alleged “fake privilege.” So ORDERED and SIGNED this 1st day of May, 2024. ____________________________________ SEAN D. JORDAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?