Eisner v. Meta Platforms, Inc.

Background

Matt Eisner, a current shareholder of Meta Platforms, Inc., brought an action under Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 concerning Meta’s proxy statement for its upcoming annual shareholder meeting. He sought declaratory and injunctive relief against Meta and Mark Zuckerberg.

Eisner moved for a preliminary injunction requiring additional disclosures in Meta’s 2024 proxy statement about internal controls concerning key enterprise risks, including protecting minors from sexual exploitation. He also sought to postpone Meta’s annual shareholder meeting so shareholders would have time to receive and review the disclosures.

Eisner separately moved for expedited discovery of documents from Meta so the court would have a complete record for deciding the preliminary-injunction motion. The motion at issue asked the court to advance the hearing date and shorten the briefing schedule for that expedited-discovery motion.

Analysis

The court applied Civil Local Rule 6-3, which requires a motion to shorten time to include specific information, including the reasons for the requested change, efforts to obtain an agreement from the opposing party, the harm that would result without an accelerated schedule, the nature of the dispute, prior schedule changes, and the effect on the case schedule.

The court found that Eisner’s motion did not satisfy those requirements. It stated that Eisner did not describe efforts to obtain a stipulation from opposing counsel or comply with the applicable meet-and-confer requirement. The motion also failed to disclose all prior schedule changes and describe the effect of the requested change on the case schedule.

The court further found that Eisner did not explain with enough detail why the schedule should be shortened or what substantial harm would result from leaving it unchanged. According to the court, the supporting declaration largely repeated the motion’s arguments and asserted, without supporting facts, that expedited discovery was needed before a deadline for Eisner’s preliminary-injunction reply. The court also stated that Eisner did not explain why the existing schedule would prevent him from presenting a complete record, particularly because the preliminary-injunction hearing was not scheduled until June 29, 2024.

Ruling

The court DENIED Eisner’s administrative motion to advance the briefing schedule and hearing date for his expedited-discovery motion. It also denied the motion in the exercise of its discretion because Eisner had not shown that the existing schedule justified the requested change. This order did not decide the underlying claims concerning Meta’s proxy statement, the preliminary injunction, or the expedited discovery itself.

The opinion is signed by Peter H. Kang, United States Magistrate Judge. The supplied case metadata identifies Charles Breyer as the judge, creating a discrepancy that may warrant review.