Kadrey v. Meta Platforms, Inc.

Background

Meta moved for a protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c)(1) to prevent plaintiffs from deposing its chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg. That rule allows a court, for good cause, to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense, including by limiting or forbidding a deposition.

The court discussed the special concerns associated with an “apex deposition,” meaning the deposition of a high-level executive. Courts generally consider whether the executive has unique, firsthand, nonrepetitive knowledge about the case and whether the requesting party has pursued less intrusive discovery methods. The court also noted that completing other discovery first is a consideration, not an absolute requirement, and that courts rarely prohibit a deposition entirely without extraordinary circumstances.

Court’s Analysis

The court held that Meta had not met its burden of showing extraordinary circumstances that would justify blocking Zuckerberg’s deposition altogether. Plaintiffs submitted evidence that Zuckerberg was the chief decision-maker and policy setter for Meta’s generative-artificial-intelligence branch and the development of the large language models involved in the case. The evidence also indicated that he was the principal decision-maker regarding Meta’s decision to open-source the language model and that he directly supervised Meta’s artificial-intelligence products.

The court rejected the argument that plaintiffs were relying only on Zuckerberg’s position as Meta’s chief executive. Instead, it found that plaintiffs had presented evidence of his specific involvement in the artificial-intelligence initiatives at issue. Because of that showing, the court declined to require plaintiffs to complete other forms of discovery before taking the deposition.

Disposition

Judge Thomas S. Hixson denied Meta’s motion for a protective order. The order allows Zuckerberg’s deposition to proceed; the opinion states that Meta did not propose limiting the deposition to less than the default seven-hour period if the deposition was allowed.