throbber
Case 1:23-cv-00758-JLH-SRF Document 136 Filed 09/04/24 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 2957
`Case 1:23-cv-00758-JLH-SRF Document 136 Filed 09/04/24 Page 1 of 3 PagelD #: 2957
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
` C.A. No. 23-758 (JLH)
`
`REDACTED - PUBLIC VERSION
`Originalfiling date: August 29, 2024
`Redacted filing date: September 4, 2024
`
`) )
`
`) )
`
`))
`
`)
`)
`)
`
`ORCA SECURITY LTD.,
`
`v
`
`WIZ, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Defendant.
`
`JOINT MOTION FOR TELECONFERENCE TO RESOLVE DISCOVERYDISPUTES
`
`Pursuant to the Court’s Oral Order dated August 22, 2024 (D.I. 123), Section 8(g)
`
`of the Scheduling Order (D.I. 33, D.I. 90), and Section 3(a)(iii) of the Stipulation and Order
`
`Regarding Discovery of Electronically Stored Information (D.I. 71), Plaintiff Orca Security Ltd.
`
`and Defendant Wiz, Inc. met and conferred to further reduce the issues!” identified in the parties’
`
`joint motionsfor teleconferencefiled on July 2, 2024, July 19, 2024, and August 21, 2024 (D.I. 95,
`
`108, 120), and respectfully move the Court to resolve the following discovery disputes during the
`
`September 11, 2024 teleconference:
`
`Defendantnotes that despite its efforts to resolve disputes as it understood the Court was
`1
`asking the parties to do, Plaintiff does not consider any of the issues it raised previously to be
`“resolved”; instead,it “prioritized” disputes it wants the Court to hear on September 11. Defendant
`will address the argumentative language Plaintiff includes in its footnote in Defendant’s letter
`briefing.
`
`Defendant would not permit the filing of this paper without inclusion of its argumentative
`footnote regarding the scope of the Court’s order. As the Court required, Plaintiff reduced the
`issues before the Court for the September 11 teleconference and agreed to continue working with
`Defendant to try to reach resolution regarding the removed issues. Plaintiff notes that it raised
`many of its discovery issues months ago and Wiz waited until days before this filing to represent
`that it would produce certain documents or provide additional responses. Wiz hasyetto actually
`produce any of those documents or provide a date certain for expected productions, thus Plaintiff
`has reservedits ability to re-raise those disputes in the future if need be.
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00758-JLH-SRF Document 136 Filed 09/04/24 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 2958
`Case 1:23-cv-00758-JLH-SRF Document 136 Filed 09/04/24 Page 2 of 3 PagelD #: 2958
`
`Plaintiff Orca Security Ltd.’s Issue(s) For Teleconference:
`
`1. Defendant’s deficient responses to Orca’s Interrogatory Nos. 2 and 6 and
`withholding of source code, git history, and JIRA documents;
`
`2. Defendant’s deficient responses to Orca’s Second Set of Requests for
`Production (Nos. 84-90);
`
`3. Defendant’s deficient responses to Orca’s Third Set of Requests for
`Production (Nos. 91, 92, 94 and 113);
`
`4. Defendant’s deficient production of documents and communications
`exchanged with or disclosed to J that are responsive to Orca’s
`Requests for Production Nos. 16-23, 25-27, 38, 44, 49, 57, 68, 73, 95, 135,
`154-55, 157, and 159-61; and
`
`5. Defendant’s deficient response to Orca’s Interrogatory No. 15.
`
`Defendant Wiz, Inc.’s Issue(s) For Teleconference:
`
`1. Plaintiff's deficient responses to Defendant’s Interrogatory Nos. 2, 4, 12,
`and 13;
`
`2. Plaintiffs deficient responses to Wiz’s Requests for Production Nos. 54 and
`73; and
`
`3. Plaintiffs deficient production of core technical documents pursuantto the
`Default Standard for Discovery, Including Discovery of Electronically
`Stored Information, { 4.b.
`
`The following attorneys, including at least one Delaware Counsel andat least one
`
`Lead Counselper party, participated in one or more verbal meet-and-confers by telephone on the
`
`following dates: July 9, 2024, August 2, 2024, August 14, 2024, August 16, 2024, and August 27,
`
`2024.
`
`Delaware Counsel:
`
`e Orca: Jack Blumenfeld and Rodger Smith (Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell);
`
`e Wiz: Fred Cottrell, Christine Haynes, and Kelly Farnan (Richards, Layton &
`
`Finger)
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00758-JLH-SRF Document 136 Filed 09/04/24 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 2959
`Case 1:23-cv-00758-JLH-SRF Document 136 Filed 09/04/24 Page 3 of 3 PagelD #: 2959
`
`Lead Counsel:
`
`e Orca: Blake Davis, Chris Henry, Krissy McKenna, Lucas Lonergan, Peter
`
`Hoffman, and Nicole Bruner (Latham & Watkins);
`
`e Wiz: Jordan, Jaffe, Caty Lacey, Lisa Zang, Praatika Prasad, Alex Miller, and
`
`Sachli Nayeri (Wilson Sonsini)
`
`The parties are available for a teleconference on September 11, 2024 at 3:00 pm
`
`ET,i.e., the date and time the Court set for a teleconference to resolve discovery disputes (D.I. 95),
`
`or will otherwise make themselves available at the Court’s convenience.
`
`Morris, NICHOLS, ARSHT &TUNNELL LLP
`
`RICHARD, LAYTON & FINGER,P.A.
`
`/s/ Rodger D. Smith II
`
`/s/Kelly E. Farnan
`
`Jack B. Blumenfeld (#1014)
`Rodger D. Smith IT (#3778)
`Cameron P. Clark (#6647)
`1201 North Market Street
`P.O. Box 1347
`Wilmington, DE 19899-1347
`(302) 658-9200
`jblumenfeld@morrisnichols.com
`rsmith@morrisnichols.com
`cclark@morrisnichols.com
`
`Frederick L. Cottrell, [II (#2555)
`Kelly E. Farnan (#4395)
`Christine D. Haynes (#4697)
`One Rodney Square
`920 North King Street
`Wilmington, DE 19801
`(302) 651-7700
`cottrell@rlficom
`farnan@rlf.com
`haynes@rlf.com
`
`Attorneysfor PlaintiffOrca Security Ltd.
`
`Attorneysfor Defendant Wiz, Inc.
`
`August 29, 2024
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket