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

WAYMO LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.17-cv-00939-WHA (JSC)

ORDER GRANTING IN PART MOTION 

TO COMPEL INTERROGAROY 

RESPONSES

Re: Dkt. No. 1127

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33 limits each party to 25 interrogatories unless the parties 

stipulate or the court orders otherwise. Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(a)(1). Otto Trucking served Waymo 

with 25 interrogatories and Uber served Waymo with 24 interrogatories in several separate

requests. Then Uber/Ottomotto LLC purported to serve Waymo with an additional three and then 

an additional 23 interrogatories for a total of 50 from Uber/Ottomotto. Waymo objects to 

answering interrogatories 26 through 50 on the ground that they exceed the number permitted by 

Rule 33 and Uber did not obtain permission from the Court for additional interrogatories. 

Uber/Ottomotto claims that Ottomotto LLC is a separate party from Uber and therefore entitled to 

its own 25 interrogatories. The Court disagrees. 

Uber’s reliance on the Special Master is disingenuous. Ottomotto is not meaningfully 

distinct from Uber and throughout this litigation Uber has not treated Ottomotto as a separate 

entity. It is apparent that the Special Master, Uber, Waymo and this Court have always treated 

Ottomotto as part of Uber and not a separate party. Uber never raised with the Special Master its 

current position that Uber/Ottomotto can ask 50 interrogatories of Waymo. Uber should have done 

so and if the matter could not be resolved, should have forthrightly asked the Court for additional 

interrogatories. Given the complexity of the case, and the short discovery period, allowing Uber 

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 1173 Filed 08/14/17 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

to ask more than 25 interrogatories would have been warranted. But Uber chose not to take that 

more straight forward path.

Nonetheless, as at least some of the interrogatories ask for substantive information relevant 

to this litigation, the Court will allow Uber to ask an additional 10 interrogatories. On or before 

noon on Tuesday, August 15, 2017, Uber shall identify which 10 of already-served interrogatories 

26 through 50 Uber wishes Waymo to respond. Waymo shall respond by Tuesday, August 22, 

2017. The Court is not granting Waymo additional interrogatories as it has not identified any that 

it needs and it is too late for it to come back and do so now. As the Court previously noted, it will 

not order discovery just for the sake of ordering discovery.

This Order disposes of Docket No. 1127. Objections, if any, must be filed with the district 

court on or before noon on August 16, 2017.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 14, 2017 

JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 1173 Filed 08/14/17 Page 2 of 2