Shared Partnership v. Meta Platforms, Inc.
- Richard Seeborg
- 3:22-cv-02366
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Shared Partnership v. Meta Platforms, Judge Seeborg granted Meta’s request for a letter rogatory to seek Canadian third-party discovery relevant to potential damages.
Meta Platforms, Inc. may seek documents and deposition testimony from third-party Sampford Advisors in Canada; Shared Partnership did not oppose the request.
What happened
In Shared Partnership v. Meta Platforms, Inc., Meta sought documents and deposition testimony from Sampford Advisors, a third party located in Canada. Shared Partnership alleges that Meta’s conduct affected its valuation, and Meta said Sampford had helped determine Shared Partnership’s enterprise value.
Shared Partnership did not oppose Meta’s administrative motion. Meta requested the letter rogatory to obtain evidence for its defenses, including information relevant to potential damages.
Judge Richard Seeborg granted the motion after finding good cause and concluding that the requested discovery was relevant. The court ordered that Meta’s proposed letter of request and attached schedules be issued.
The detailed version
- Shared Partnership v. Meta Platforms, Inc. · No. 3:22-cv-02366
- Richard Seeborg
- Feb. 8, 2024
Background
Meta requested a letter rogatory, also called a letter of request, to obtain documents and deposition testimony from Sampford Advisors, an entity located in Canada. A letter rogatory is a court’s request to a foreign court to take evidence from a witness located in that country.
Shared Partnership alleges that Meta’s conduct affected Shared Partnership’s valuation. Meta contended that Sampford Advisors served as Shared Partnership’s consultant and played a critical role in determining Shared Partnership’s enterprise value during the relevant period. Meta sought the discovery to prepare its defenses. Shared Partnership did not oppose the motion.
Court’s Analysis
The court stated that federal courts have inherent power to issue letters rogatory. It also noted that discovery must be relevant and nonprivileged under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b). The court found the requested discovery relevant to potential damages because of Sampford Advisors’ alleged role in developing Shared Partnership’s valuation.
Disposition
Judge Richard Seeborg found that good cause had been shown and granted Meta’s administrative motion for issuance of a letter rogatory. The court ordered that Meta’s proposed letter of request, together with its attached schedules, be issued.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.