Case 4:19-cv-07123-PJH         Document 885       Filed 10/16/26      Page 1 of 2


                                  1

                                  2

                                  3                                  UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                                  4                              NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

                                  5

                                  6
                                         WHATSAPP INC., et al.,
                                  7                                                       Case No. 19-cv-07123-PJH
                                                       Plaintiffs,
                                  8
                                                 v.                                       ORDER RE POST-JUDGMENT
                                  9                                                       DISCOVERY DISPUTES
                                         NSO GROUP TECHNOLOGIES
                                  10     LIMITED, et al.,                                 Re: Dkt. 870, 873, 874, 881

                                  11                   Defendants.

                                  12


 United States District Court
                                  13

                                  14          The parties in the above-captioned case have multiple disputes regarding post-
                                  15   judgment discovery. See Dkt. 870, 873, 874, 881. The parties first filed a joint letter brief


Northern District of California
                                  16   (Dkt. 870), which was followed by a unilateral letter filed by defendants (Dkt. 873), then a
                                  17   unilateral letter filed by plaintiffs (Dkt. 874). The court then directed the parties to file an
                                  18   updated joint letter. See Dkt. 881.
                                  19          To summarize the disputes, plaintiffs argue that defendants have refused to
                                  20   produce responsive discovery regarding its financing, tax returns, distributions and
                                  21   compensation, and valuations, which are relevant to plaintiffs’ efforts to collect more than
                                  22   $20 million of unpaid judgments. See Dkt. 870. Defendants argue that plaintiffs seek
                                  23   overly-expansive discovery far beyond defendants’ executable assets. See id. The
                                  24   parties also dispute plaintiffs’ right to take deposition testimony. See Dkt. 881.
                                  25          Both parties seek to file a motion to obtain their requested relief. Specifically,
                                  26   plaintiffs seek to file a motion to compel discovery, while defendants seek to file a motion
                                  27   for protective order. See Dkt. 881. Both proposed motions appear to seek an answer on
                                  28   the same discovery issues. Thus, it would be duplicative to have two motions, two


                                        Case 4:19-cv-07123-PJH        Document 885       Filed 10/16/26    Page 2 of 2


                                  1    opposition briefs, and two reply briefs, all concerning the same discovery issues.

                                  2    Accordingly, the court sets the following briefing schedule to resolve pending discovery

                                  3    issues: the parties shall file cross-motions on October 30, 2026, with plaintiffs filing a

                                  4    motion to compel and defendants filing a motion for protective order. On November 14,

                                  5    2026, each side shall file a single responsive brief, addressing the arguments made in

                                  6    the opposing party’s motion. No further briefing will be accepted, and the motions will

                                  7    thereafter be decided on the papers. Each brief is limited to twenty (20) pages.

                                  8

                                  9           IT IS SO ORDERED.

                                  10   Dated: October 16, 2026

                                  11                                                    /s/ Phyllis J. Hamilton
                                                                                    PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON
                                  12                                                United States District Judge


 United States District Court
                                  13

                                  14

                                  15


Northern District of California
                                  16

                                  17

                                  18

                                  19

                                  20

                                  21

                                  22

                                  23

                                  24

                                  25

                                  26

                                  27

                                  28
                                                                                     2