United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WAYMO LLC,

Plaintiff,

 v.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,

OTTOMOTTO LLC, and OTTO

TRUCKING LLC,

Defendants. /

No. C 17-00939 WHA

ORDER SETTING

DEPOSITIONS

To keep this case on track for the agreed-upon trial date, an earlier order requested that

counsel meet with the special master and agree upon a series of dates for all remaining

depositions that need to be taken. Counsel failed to do so. As a result, to keep this case on

track, the Court now resorts to setting a schedule and ORDERS that the following depositions go

forward on the following dates, all commencing at 8:00 a.m. and lasting up to seven hours:

NAME DEPOSITION DATE

Pierre-Yves Droz Monday, July 10

Bryan Salesky (by defendants) Tuesday, July 11

William McCann Wednesday, July 12

Drew Ulrich Thursday, July 13

Larry Page Monday, July 17

Max Levandowski Tuesday, July 18

Eric Meyhofer Wednesday, July 19

Ognen Stojanovski Thursday, July 20

Bryan Salesky (by Waymo) Monday, July 24

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 725 Filed 06/23/17 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2

Adam Bentley Tuesday, July 25

Zachary Morris Wednesday, July 26

Travis Kalanick Thursday, July 27

Emil Michael Monday, July 31

Brian McClendon Tuesday, August 1

John Krafcik Wednesday, August 2

Eric Tate Thursday, August 3

Sebastian Thrun Monday, August 7

Sam Lenius Tuesday, August 8

Chris Urmson Wednesday, August 9

Anthony Levandowski Thursday, August 10

The foregoing schedule may be modified upon written agreement in advance by all

parties. This schedule is without prejudice to any motion, made promptly and in good faith

before Judge Corley, for a protective order. Any unilateral motion to change a date on the

schedule, however, must (1) show compelling reasons — not merely good cause — for the

requested change and (2) offer an alternative date reasonably close to the assigned date. 

Otherwise, unavailability of deponents is no excuse. They must make themselves

available. If documents reasonably called for before a deposition are produced after the

deposition, the party making the late production of documents shall pay for all expenses,

including attorney’s fees, associated with re-opening the deposition to allow further

examination with respect to the subject matter of the belatedly-produced documents. This order

is not a substitute for subpoenas, which must still be served on non-party deponents. This

schedule is without prejudice to counsel noticing other depositions before the discovery cut-off,

subject to the overall deposition limit. More than one deposition may be scheduled for the same

day. In no event may depositions be taken after the discovery cut-off. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 23, 2017. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 725 Filed 06/23/17 Page 2 of 2