DEFENDANTS’ SUBMISSION RE: PROPOSED DEPOSITION SCHEDULE 

Case No. 3:17-cv-00939-WHA 

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 

MICHAEL A. JACOBS (CA SBN 111664)

MJacobs@mofo.com 

ARTURO J. GONZÁLEZ (CA SBN 121490) 

AGonzalez@mofo.com 

ERIC A. TATE (CA SBN 178719) 

ETate@mofo.com 

RUDY Y. KIM (CA SBN 199426) 

RKim@mofo.com 

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP

425 Market Street 

San Francisco, California 94105-2482 

Telephone: 415.268.7000 

Facsimile: 415.268.7522 

KAREN L. DUNN (Pro Hac Vice) 

kdunn@bsfllp.com 

HAMISH P.M. HUME (Pro Hac Vice) 

hhume@bsfllp.com 

BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP 

1401 New York Avenue, N.W. 

Washington DC 20005 

Telephone: 202.237.2727 

Facsimile: 202.237.6131 

Attorneys for Defendants 

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

and OTTOMOTTO LLC 

ADDITIONAL COUNSEL LISTED ON SIGNATURE PAGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

WAYMO LLC, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., 

OTTOMOTTO LLC; OTTO TRUCKING LLC, 

Defendants. 

Case No. 3:17-cv-00939-WHA

DEFENDANTS UBER 

TECHNOLOGIES, INC., OTTOMOTTO 

LLC AND OTTO TRUCKING LLC’S 

PROPOSED DEPOSITION SCHEDULE 

IN RESPONSE TO THE COURT’S JUNE 

14, 2017 ORDER 

Ctrm: 8, 19th Floor 

Judge: The Honorable William Alsup 

Trial Date: October 10, 2017

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 672 Filed 06/21/17 Page 1 of 4
1 

DEFENDANTS’ SUBMISSION RE: PROPOSED DEPOSITION SCHEDULE 

Case No. 3:17-cv-00939-WHA 

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 

This submission responds to this Court’s Order Dkt. No. 622, dated June 14, 2017, in 

which the Court directed the parties to meet and confer and develop a schedule under which all 

depositions will be completed before the August 24, 2017 fact discovery cutoff. The parties have 

met and conferred with the assistance of the special master, but have not been able to agree on a 

proposed schedule. 

Defendants Uber Technologies, Inc., Ottomotto LLC (collectively, “Uber”), and Otto 

Trucking LLC (collectively, “Defendants”) hereby submit the following proposed schedule, 

which will allow for the completion of all depositions within the fact discovery period and the 

prompt resolution of any disputes that might delay the deposition schedule. In making this 

submission, Defendants note that any symmetrical schedule necessarily disadvantages Defendants 

because while Waymo LLC (“Waymo”) has received very substantial discovery from Uber, 

Waymo is withholding much of the discovery to which Defendants are entitled and upon which 

Defendants would rely in deposition. Uber is concerned about prejudice to its defense. 

Defendants nonetheless are proposing a symmetrical deposition schedule, which Defendants hope 

will demonstrate that Defendants are acting in good faith and seeking to move discovery forward; 

Defendants hope Waymo will do the same. 

Defendants propose the following schedule: 

1. By June 23, the parties shall notice at least six of their party depositions and issue 

subpoenas for at least three of their non-party depositions. The depositions do not have to be 

noticed for a specific time frame based on the date the notice or subpoena is issued. 

2. By June 30, or a later date agreed upon by the parties, Waymo shall take its last 

expedited deposition. 

3. By July 5, the parties shall notice at least six of their party depositions and issue 

subpoenas for at least four of their non-party depositions. 

4. By July 24, any party seeking additional depositions beyond those allotted by the 

Court must raise the issue with all parties and the Special Master. Any depositions granted must 

be noticed (or subpoenas issued) within two days of the decision granting those depositions. 

// 

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 672 Filed 06/21/17 Page 2 of 4
2 

DEFENDANTS’ SUBMISSION RE: PROPOSED DEPOSITION SCHEDULE 

Case No. 3:17-cv-00939-WHA 

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 

5. The parties will make good faith efforts to schedule depositions of witnesses 

Waymo contends are likely to have information regarding Defendants’ alleged use of Waymo’s 

trade secrets on or before July 31, provided that those depositions are reasonable in number and 

Waymo provides reasonable advance notice. 

6. By August 7, the parties shall notice their remaining party depositions and issue 

any remaining deposition subpoenas. 

7. The parties should set dates for non-expedited party depositions within three days 

after the deposition notice is served or notice of the requested deposition is otherwise given, in 

accordance with Paragraph 9, below. The date scheduled should be within seven days of the 

noticed date. 

8. If the responding party objects to a noticed deposition, the party will raise those 

objections within one day of receipt of the deposition notice. The parties will meet and confer 

with the assistance of the Special Master concerning any objections. If the parties are unable to 

resolve their dispute within three days of the deposition notice, the Special Master will set a 

briefing schedule and page limits for the dispute. 

9. A formal deposition notice is not required for party depositions. Any party may 

notice a party deposition by email to opposing counsel identifying the deponent, a proposed date, 

and a proposed location. 

10. This schedule assumes the parties will notice a reasonable number of depositions 

proportional to the needs of the case within the scheduled time frame. Any party may seek relief 

should other parties notice an unreasonably large number of depositions and/or depositions that 

are not material to this case. 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 672 Filed 06/21/17 Page 3 of 4
3 

DEFENDANTS’ SUBMISSION RE: PROPOSED DEPOSITION SCHEDULE 

Case No. 3:17-cv-00939-WHA 

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 

Dated: June 21, 2017 BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP

By: /s/ Karen L. Dunn 

KAREN L. DUNN 

Attorneys for Defendants 

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

and OTTOMOTTO LLC 

Dated: June 21, 2017 GOODWIN PROCTER LLP

By: /s/ Shane Brun 

GOODWIN PROCTER LLP 

Indra Neel Chatterjee (SBN 173985) 

nchatterjee@goodwinlaw.com 

Goodwin Procter LLP 

135 Commonwealth Drive 

Menlo Park, CA 94025 

Tel: (650) 752-3100 

Fax: (650) 853-1038 

Brett M. Schuman (SBN 189247) 

bschuman@goodwinlaw.com 

Shane Brun (SBN 179079) 

sbrun@goodwinlaw.com 

Rachel M. Walsh (SBN 250568) 

rwalsh@goodwinlaw.com 

Goodwin Procter LLP 

Three Embarcadero Center 

San Francisco, California 94111 

Tel.: (415) 733 6000 

Fax.: (415) 677 9041 

Attorneys for Defendants 

OTTO TRUCKING LLC 

ATTESTATION OF E-FILED SIGNATURE

I, Karen L. Dunn, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this 

document. In compliance with General Order 45, X.B., I hereby attest that Shane Brun has 

concurred in this filing. 

Dated: June 21, 2017 

/s/ Karen L. Dunn

Karen L. Dunn 

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 672 Filed 06/21/17 Page 4 of 4