Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_17-cv-04426/USCOURTS-cand-3_17-cv-04426-16/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Symantec Corporation
Counter-defendant
Zscaler, Inc.
Counter-claimant

Document Text:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SYMANTEC CORPORATION,

Plaintiff,

v.

ZSCALER, INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 17-cv-04426-JST (TSH)

DISCOVERY ORDER

Re: Dkt. No. 262

The Court held a telephonic hearing today concerning the May 8, 2019 joint discovery 

letter brief submitted by Plaintiff Symantec Corporation and Defendant Zscaler, Inc. ECF No. 

262. During the hearing, Symantec clarified that its proposed narrowing in the letter brief was 

limited to RFP 68, and in response to the Court’s questions about RFP 77, proposed a narrowed 

RFP 77. Zscaler had not heard this proposed narrowed RFP 77 before and proposed to meet and 

confer about it. With respect to RFP 68, the parties disagree about the effect, if any, their ESI and 

custodian stipulation has on Zscaler’s obligation to search for documents that were sent by email 

to the venture capital firms identified in Symantec’s proposed narrowed RFP 68. The Court does 

not have the text of that stipulation in front of it so is unable to say who is right. Finally, Zscaler’s 

burden arguments in the letter brief appeared directed at RFP 68 as originally drafted and did not 

address the burden of responding to the narrowed RFP. For all of these issues, the Court requires 

further briefing.

The Court ORDERS as follows:

1. The parties shall meet and confer concerning Symantec’s proposed narrowing of RFP 

77 to see if they can reach an agreement.

2. Within one week, the parties shall submit a further joint discovery letter brief, 

Case 3:17-cv-04426-JST Document 267 Filed 05/16/19 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

discussing: (a) the narrowed RFP 77 (if that issue is not resolved during meet and confer), (b) the 

effect of the ESI and custodian stipulation on Zscaler’s obligation to produce documents in 

response to RFPs 68 and 77, (c) Zscaler’s burden in responding to the narrowed RFP 68, and (d) 

other issues the parties wish to raise concerning RFPs 68 and 77.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 16, 2019

THOMAS S. HIXSON

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:17-cv-04426-JST Document 267 Filed 05/16/19 Page 2 of 2