Wang v. Ehang Holdings Limited
- Beth Freeman
- 5:20-cv-00569
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Wang v. Ehang Holdings Limited, Judge Freeman denied defendants’ motion to continue trial because they did not show good cause and delay would prejudice plaintiff.
The ruling affects the defendants, whose request to postpone the trial was denied, and Gary Wang, who opposed the postponement and whom the court said could be unfairly prejudiced by a lengthy delay.
What happened
In Wang v. Ehang Holdings Limited, the defendants asked to postpone the trial by 90 to 120 days. Plaintiff opposed the request. The defendants said they had stopped pursuing visa applications because of the COVID-19 Omicron variant.
The court found that the defendants had not shown good cause, meaning a sufficient reason, for another delay. They provided no evidence that Omicron prevented them from pursuing visas, and a declaration from an EHang employee did not establish personal knowledge about the individual defendants’ visa applications. The court also noted that the requested postponement would delay the trial by more than two years and unfairly harm the plaintiff, who sued in 2020 over alleged unpaid compensation.
Judge Beth Labson Freeman denied the defendants’ administrative motion to continue the trial. The court noted that witnesses unable to travel could ask to testify by video, although defense counsel had submitted a declaration saying technical problems could make that difficult.
The detailed version
- Wang v. Ehang Holdings Limited · No. 5:20-cv-00569
- Beth Freeman
- Feb. 14, 2022
Background
The defendants filed an administrative motion to continue the trial. Plaintiff Gary Wang opposed the motion. The defendants requested a 90- to 120-day continuance, and this was their second request to postpone the trial.
The court had granted the defendants’ first request in July 2021 because of COVID-19-related travel restrictions between China and the United States. For the second request, the defendants acknowledged that the government had lifted the travel ban but asserted that they had stopped their visa applications because of the Omicron variant. The case concerns alleged unpaid compensation.
Legal standard
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4), a scheduling order may be changed only for “good cause” and with the judge’s consent. The court explained that good cause primarily depends on whether the party seeking the change acted diligently—meaning whether it made reasonable efforts to meet the existing schedule.
Court’s reasoning
The court found that the defendants had not shown good cause. They submitted no evidence establishing that Omicron prevented them from pursuing their visa applications. The declaration from Xiping Wang identified Xiping Wang only as an employee of EHang Holdings Limited and did not establish personal knowledge about the individual defendants’ visa applications. The individual defendants also submitted no supporting declarations. Based on that record, the court could not find that the defendants had diligently pursued visas that would allow them to testify at trial.
The court also found that the requested continuance would cause a delay of more than two years because the court had no trial availability during the requested period and was setting trials in late 2024. It concluded that such a delay would unfairly prejudice Plaintiff Wang, who had filed the suit in 2020.
The court noted that a witness unable to travel could request permission to testify by Zoom. Defense counsel had submitted a declaration suggesting that Zoom testimony would not be feasible because of technical difficulties, but the court stated that it had conducted numerous proceedings by Zoom without difficulty and that counsel and the defendants had ample time to address the issue.
Disposition
Judge Beth Labson Freeman denied the defendants’ administrative motion to continue the trial date. The opinion does not decide the underlying compensation claims.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.