Thompson v. Oracle Corporation
- 3:21-cv-00026
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Thompson v. Oracle Corporation, the court ordered defendants to provide identifying information about Jeff Carpenter in this discovery dispute.
The order directly affects the defendants, who must search for and provide Carpenter’s identifying information, and both parties, who must maintain the information’s restricted confidentiality and report when this discovery is complete.
What happened
In Thompson v. Oracle Corporation, the court addressed the search for Jeff Carpenter, a former Sun Microsystems employee described as a likely key witness. Defendants said their initial efforts to locate him had not succeeded.
The court noted that Oracle finalized its purchase of Sun Microsystems in 2010, so defendants might have identifying information about Sun’s former employees. The court ordered defendants to provide all known identifying information and identifiers for Carpenter that they possessed or constructively possessed.
The information must be treated as highly confidential and shared only with specified personnel. The parties must notify the court in writing within two days after defendants comply that discovery on this issue is complete. The court issued the order on May 12, 2023.
The detailed version
- Thompson v. Oracle Corporation · No. 3:21-cv-00026
- May 12, 2023
Background
At a further case-management conference on May 11, 2023, the court asked about Jeff Carpenter. The opinion describes Carpenter as a former employee of Sun Microsystems, Inc., and a person likely to be a key witness. Defendants reported that they had tried to locate him but that their initial efforts were unsuccessful.
The court stated that district courts have broad discretion to control discovery. It cited Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(1)(A)(ii), which requires parties to disclose documents, electronically stored information, and tangible things in their possession, custody, or control that they may use to support their claims or defenses. The court also cited Rule 37(c)(1), which generally prevents a party from using information or a witness that it failed to disclose as required, unless the failure was substantially justified or harmless.
Reasoning
The court noted that it was undisputed that Oracle finalized its purchase of Sun Microsystems on or about January 27, 2010. Based on that fact, the court found it possible that defendants had acquired or possessed identifying information about former Sun Microsystems employees, including Carpenter.
Order
The court ordered defendants to provide, immediately, all known identifying information and identifiers for Carpenter in their actual or constructive possession. The information must be designated “Highly Confidential — Attorneys’ Eyes Only” and may be shared only with counsel, their identified investigator, or necessary support staff. Within two days after complying, both parties must notify the court in writing that discovery on this issue is complete. The court entered the discovery order on May 12, 2023.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.