Arcell et al v. Google LLC et al

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
MARY KATHERINE ARCELL, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
GOOGLE LLC, et al.,
Defendants.
Case No. 22-cv-02499-RFL (SK)
ORDER ON DISCOVERY DISPUTE
REGARDING DEPOSITION
SUBPOENA
Regarding Docket No. 190
Now before the Court is the discovery dispute between the parties regarding Plaintiffs’
subpoena to Google LLC’s former Chief Operating Officer, Eric Schmidt, to appear for a
deposition. Plaintiffs seek Schmidt’s deposition, but Defendants oppose that attempt. This issue
is similar to one the parties previously presented to the Court. The Court previously denied
Plaintiffs’ request to take the deposition of Schmidt, among others, under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 26(c)(1). (Dkt. No. 159.) At that time, the Court noted that Plaintiffs had taken no
discovery and that they could renew their attempt to take the depositions of Schmidt and others
“once they exhaust other methods of discovery.” (Id.)
Here, Defendants note that, as of the time of filing of the letter brief at issue, Plaintiffs had
taken no depositions at all. Again, the Court DENIES Plaintiffs’ request without prejudice, for the
same reasons explained previously. However, the Court notes that, having objected to the
deposition of Schmidt, Defendants cannot at a later date present testimony from Schmidt without
the ability by Plaintiffs to examine him.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 14, 2026
______________________________________
SALLIE KIM
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 3:22-cv-02499-RFL Document 207 Filed 01/14/26 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
Case 3:22-cv-02499-RFL Document 207 Filed 01/14/26 Page 2 of 2