Plaintiff moved to add twenty-two additional custodians for production by the defendant. In ruling, the court stated that both parties failed to fully address the legal standard under Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 26, as the plaintiff did not address the proportionality factors and the defendant did not assert that the information sought was irrelevant or too expensive. The court therefore used its “best judgment based on the limited information before it” and allowed the plaintiff to select ten additional custodians.
Oracle v. Google, 2015 WL 7775243 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 3, 2015).