Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 10, 2026

Ridder v. Roblox Corporation

Judge
Vince Chhabria
Docket
3:23-cv-04146
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2

Counsel39 of record
PLAINTIFF
Gibbs Mura LLPLLP4 attorneys
Andre Michel Mura, Jake Miles Seidman, Ezekiel Wald
Jennings & Earley PLLCPLLC3 attorneys
Winston Hudson, Christopher D. Jennings, Tyler B. Ewigleben
Weitz & Luxenberg, P.C.PC2 attorneys
Aaron Freedman, Devin Lynn Bolton
Angela Anqi Ma
Weitz and Luxenberg, P.C.PC
James J. Bilsborrow
One Old Country Road, Suite 347
Brett R. Cohen
Levin Sedran & Berman
Charles E. Schaffer
Audet & Partners, LLPLLP
Ling Yue Kuang
McShane Law, PCPC
Michael Andrew McShane
MOVANT
Aaron Freedman Weitz & Luxenberg, P.C.
DEFENDANT
Cooley LLPLLP10 attorneys
Eduardo E. Santacana, Judd D. Lauter, Kyle Wong
Kronenberger Rosenfeld, LLPLLP3 attorneys
Jeffrey Michael Rosenfeld, Leah Rosa Vulic, Karl Stephen Kronenberger
Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLPLLP3 attorneys
Jacquie Andreano, Sonja N. Riley-Swanbeck, Steven Paul Ragland
Dynamis LLPLLP2 attorneys
Constantine Philip Economides, Yusef Al-Jarani
Haynes and Boone, LLPLLP2 attorneys
David Brandon Clark, Kevin Crisp , Crisp
Husch Blackwell LLPLLP
Jennifer J. Lee
Cooley LLP - Library
Caitlin B. Munley
Keker and Van Nest LLPLLP
Cody Shawn Harris

Counsel of record per CourtListener. Firm names are approximate and have been consolidated across spelling variants.

DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Yaniv De Ridder v. Roblox, Judge Illman denied Roblox’s request to compel Nathan Soucek’s privileged mental-health records.

Who this affects

Nathan Soucek and Roblox Corporation; the ruling concerns Roblox’s request for Soucek’s private mental-health records.

What happened

In Yaniv De Ridder, et al. v. Roblox Corporation, et al., Roblox asked the court to require plaintiff Nathan Soucek to produce communications with his therapists. Roblox argued the records were relevant to the claims, defenses, and Soucek’s adequacy as a proposed class representative.

Soucek argued that he had no additional responsive records, that the records were private and disproportionate to the needs of the case, and that an earlier privilege waiver related to damages claims that had been dismissed. The court agreed with Soucek, ruling that the mental-health records of a minor were privileged and that Soucek had not waived that privilege by placing his mental health at issue. The court also agreed that the earlier waiver could be withdrawn because those damages were no longer at issue, and denied the request to compel the records.

United States Magistrate Judge Bert M. Illman issued the order on March 10, 2026.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Ridder v. Roblox Corporation · No. 3:23-cv-04146
Judge
Vince Chhabria
Date
Mar. 10, 2026

Background

The court considered a joint letter brief about whether plaintiff Nathan Soucek had to produce communications with therapists Gary Jeandron and David Leong in response to Roblox Corporation’s document requests. Roblox argued that Soucek had identified the therapists in discovery, produced a document expressly waiving the therapist-patient privilege, and acknowledged that the therapy records contained information about his use of virtual casino words, gambling, gambling addiction, and theft from family members. Roblox contended that the records were relevant to causation, damages, Soucek’s use of virtual casino words, Roblox’s defenses, and whether Soucek was an adequate and typical representative of the proposed classes.

Soucek argued that he had conducted a reasonable search and knew of no additional responsive documents. He also argued that requiring production of a minor’s private medical records was not relevant or proportional to the needs of the case. Soucek said the earlier waiver concerned now-dismissed damages claims involving his mother’s pain and suffering, so the waiver should no longer apply.

Court’s Analysis

The court stated that the records were private mental-health records of a minor and were privileged. It explained that discoverability did not turn only on relevance, even if the records might be highly relevant. Instead, the question was whether Soucek had waived the psychotherapist-patient privilege by placing the protected information at issue. The court also stated that the analysis did not require balancing privacy against the usefulness of the evidence or Roblox’s need for it.

The court concluded that Soucek had not waived the privilege by placing the information at issue. Soucek had stated that he had no theory of damages related to his mental health or therapy, and the court said he would be held to that position. The court further agreed that, because the damages theory involving his mental health was no longer at issue, the initial waiver could be withdrawn.

Disposition

The court denied Roblox’s request to compel Soucek’s mental-health records. United States Magistrate Judge Bert M. Illman signed the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.