Judge Chhabria is not one to mince words. Once again, he’s stressed he importance of the Kadrey v. Meta lawsuit. Plus, he has given another stern warning to Meta to refrain from engaging in any discovery abuse.
ORDER: The Court declines at this late stage to address the plaintiffs’ assertion (in their 487 opposition to Meta’s request for leave to file a rebuttal report) that Meta is failing to comply with its discovery obligations. If Meta fails to produce material it is required to produce, the plaintiffs are free to seek relief under Rule 56(d) at the appropriate time (or to argue in their papers that they would be entitled to summary judgment if only Meta had produced documents that it needed to produce). Given the magnitude of this case, Meta is urged to take a “when it doubt, produce it” approach.
Related Stories