Kannan v. Apple Inc.
- Edward Davila
- 5:17-cv-07305
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Kannan v. Apple Inc., Judge Demarchi ordered a three-hour remote deposition of Kannan while he was in India.
Apple Inc. may take the further deposition, while Raja Kannan and his counsel must cooperate and provide the required advance agreements.
What happened
Kannan v. Apple Inc. concerns Apple’s request to question Raja Kannan again after his first deposition. The court noted that some documents may have been produced late and that Kannan may have withheld other documents as privileged.
The parties disputed whether Kannan should be deposed by videoconference while in Chennai, India or required to appear in the United States. They also disagreed about the practical difficulties of conducting the deposition remotely.
Judge Virginia K. Demarchi allowed Apple to take another deposition by videoconference or telephone, limited to three hours, subject to scheduling, cooperation, and advance agreements by Kannan about the deposition’s validity and oath.
The detailed version
- Kannan v. Apple Inc. · No. 5:17-cv-07305
- Edward Davila
- Oct. 4, 2019
Background
Apple asked to take a further deposition of plaintiff Raja Kannan. The court had previously found that Apple showed some discovery documents were not produced on time before Kannan’s May 1, 2019 deposition, and that Kannan may have improperly withheld an unknown amount of responsive material based on attorney-client or other privilege.
Kannan was in Chennai, India. The parties agreed that no law or other authority prevented Kannan, whom the opinion identifies as a U.S. citizen, from voluntarily giving a deposition in India. They disagreed about the practical difficulties of a videoconference deposition and whether Kannan should instead be ordered to appear in the United States.
Court’s reasoning
The court was not persuaded that the logistical problems of conducting the deposition by videoconference in India were as serious as Apple claimed. It found that the time difference between California and Chennai was manageable for a short deposition and was not persuaded that Apple could not arrange adequate video and audio quality or provide exhibits to Kannan.
Order
The court ordered that:
- Apple may take a further deposition of Kannan by videoconference while he is in Chennai. Apple may instead use telephone means.
- The deposition is limited to three hours of testimony on the record.
- The parties must agree on a date and time. Unless they agree otherwise, Apple may select a time between 7:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. Pacific Time or between 6:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. Pacific Time.
- Apple may wait until the parties resolve their dispute over documents Kannan previously withheld as privileged before taking the further deposition.
- Apple may choose the deposition’s location in Chennai, and Kannan and his counsel must cooperate with the arrangements.
- Kannan must agree in advance not to object to the deposition or use of his testimony based on how the deposition is conducted or the fact that it occurs while he is in India.
- Kannan must agree in advance that his oath will be treated as given under oath in California and the United States.
The court also ordered Kannan to promptly tell Apple if he plans to travel to the United States before fact discovery closes, so Apple can arrange an in-person deposition there.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.