Martin Quinn is the appointed discovery Special Master in this case. ECF 266, 273. Under the terms of the order appointing Special Master Quinn, a party may file objection to, or a motion to adopt or modify, any order, report, or recommendation issued by the Special Master, within three business days of issuance. ECF 266 at Section II(12).

The Special Master has issued three recommended discovery orders:

Order No. 1 (ECF 291) concerns plaintiff’s motion to compel further testimony and document production re: spoliation, preservation of evidence and litigation hold notices. The Special Master recommends that the Court order as follows.

1. To the extent defendants have a privilege or work product protection as to the contents of the ZZX/AllRide and Jing Wang litigation hold notices, that privilege and protection has been waived as a result of the preliminary showing of spoliation of evidence by one or more of the defendants. This waiver applies only to hold notices and the subjects of litigation hold and preservation of evidence. The litigation hold notices shall be produced, with the redactions stated in the recommended order ECF 291, forthwith. Witnesses may be questioned at the deposition concerning any matter related to issues of litigation hold and preservation of evidence, as well as the general topic of the electronic evidence deletion.

2. Plaintiff’s motion to compel further answers at the three individual’s depositions is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as specified in ECF 291. Counsel shall work out an efficient means of obtaining further responses to those questions, and reasonable follow-up if desired. And,

3. During the depositions ordered by the Court on August 16, 2019 (ECF 235), counsel shall confine the scope of questioning to the electronic evidence deletion noted by the Court, including the subject of litigation hold and preservation of evidence.

Order No. 2 (ECF 297) concerns plaintiff’s motion to compel materials redacted from notes taken by expert consultant Thomas Barce. The Special Master recommends that the Court order that plaintiff’s motion be DENIED, except that the motion shall be GRANTED in part only as to the redaction on p. 7 of the 5-page document of the words “what the lawyers required.”

Finally, Order No. 3 (ECF 298) concerns discovery issues raised in joint letter briefs raised at ECF 285 and 286 and referred by me to the Special Master at ECF 292. The Special Master recommends that the Court GRANT in part and DENY in part ZZX’s motion to compel and that WeRide provide supplemental answers compliant with the Order by October 8. The Special Master also recommends that WeRide’s motion for a contempt finding or recommendation be DENIED, and that WeRide’s motion to compel further responses be GRANTED as detailed in ECF 298, with ZZX to provide further answers compliant with the Order by October 8.

I have reviewed each of the Special Master’s recommended Orders, Nos. 1-3, and find them to be well-reasoned, complete, and fair. No objections have been filed and more than three business days have passed. I therefore ADOPT each of the Special Master’s recommended Orders. The Clerk of Court is requested to clear the gavel on ECF 286.

To the extent any confusion is caused by this Order adopting deadlines that have already passed, counsel should confer with each other by November 6 and, if appropriate, confer jointly with the Special Master as to whether the deadlines should be modified. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.