Flexport, Inc. v. Freightmate AI, Inc., et al.
- Kang
- 3:25-cv-02500
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 4
Counsel of record per CourtListener. Firm names are approximate and have been consolidated across spelling variants.
In Flexport v. Freightmate AI, Magistrate Judge Kang ordered discovery production and metadata deadlines, resolving the parties’ discovery disputes.
Flexport, Inc. must meet the ordered document-production, discovery-response, and metadata deadlines. The order also affects the parties’ handling of later-generated documents and communications with third-party deponents.
What happened
Flexport, Inc. v. Freightmate AI, Inc., et al. involved several disputes about discovery, the exchange of information and documents during a lawsuit. The court held a hearing on March 5, 2026, and then issued this written order recording and modifying the parties’ proposed order.
The court ordered Flexport to produce documents it says are part of Trade Secret No. 8 by March 19, 2026, on a rolling basis, and to identify those documents by Bates number by March 20, 2026. The court also ordered timely production of later-generated documents responsive to one request and required two documents to be produced with creation or modification-date metadata by March 12, 2026.
Magistrate Judge Peter H. Kang stated that the order resolved docket item 116. The opinion does not state that the court granted or denied a motion; it memorializes the discovery rulings and imposes the listed production requirements.
The detailed version
- Flexport, Inc. v. Freightmate AI, Inc., et al. · No. 3:25-cv-02500
- Kang
- Mar. 12, 2026
Background
All discovery matters had been referred to the undersigned judge. The parties submitted a joint discovery letter brief raising several disputes. After a March 5, 2026 hearing, the court issued verbal rulings and directed the parties to submit a proposed order memorializing those rulings. The court adopted that proposed order as modified.
The order explains that discovery must concern nonprivileged information relevant to a claim or defense and proportionate to the needs of the case. It also states that the party seeking discovery bears the burden of showing relevance, while a party resisting discovery must specifically explain its objections.
Rulings
Issue 1
By March 19, 2026, Flexport must produce any remaining documents that it contends are part of Trade Secret No. 8. The documents must be produced on a rolling basis. By March 20, 2026, Flexport must supplement its response to Interrogatory No. 1 by identifying by Bates number all documents it contends are part of Trade Secret No. 8.
Issue 2
Before the hearing, Flexport had supplemented its response to Request for Production No. 46 and produced all nonprivileged documents responsive to that request. Any additional responsive documents generated after the hearing must be produced in a timely manner. Any additional responsive communications with third-party deponents must be produced at least two business days before the relevant third-party deposition.
Issue 3
Flexport identified two documents produced in connection with another issue that lacked creation or modification-date metadata: FLEXPORT 006029 and FLEXPORT_006159-006167. Flexport agreed, and the court ordered, that those documents must be produced with the requested metadata by March 12, 2026.
Disposition
The court stated: “This Order RESOLVES Dkt. 116.” It did not characterize the result as granting or denying a motion. The order was signed by Peter H. Kang, United States Magistrate Judge, and dated March 11, 2026.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.