Special Master Slams Uber and In-House Lawyer for Withholding Letter From Waymo
A report from John Cooper, the special master in the Uber v. Waymo showdown, sharply criticizes Uber and the company's embattled deputy GC Angela Padilla.
December 15, 2017 at 05:41 PM
5 minute read
Uber's legal department is looking worse and worse as more information surfaces about an in-house lawyer's handling of a potentially critical document in the ride-hailing company's epic trade secrets battle with Waymo.
In a report released Friday afternoon, special master in the case, John Cooper, slammed San Francisco-based Uber, which he said had been obligated to produce an inflammatory letter from ex-employee Richard Jacobs' lawyer to Uber deputy GC Angela Padilla in earlier requests for evidence.
“It is not easy, in abstract, to determine where the line regarding the scope of discovery search should be drawn,” Cooper wrote. “But this is not a case involving mere possession of some document. The facts in this case suggest Ms. Padilla knew of the Jacobs letter at the time Uber had to respond to discovery requests calling for its production—it certainly was 'reasonably accessible.'”
Uber representatives didn't immediately respond to requests for comment on the special master's report.
Cooper's report states the letter should have been produced during discovery requests which were served to Uber on May 9, 2017. Padilla received the letter on May 5.
Uber's legal team, outside counsel from Morrison & Foerster led by Arturo Gonzalez, had argued in pretrial hearings that the May 5 letter from lawyer Clayton Halunen hadn't been produced earlier because its contents and date range were outside the search terms set by Waymo. Gonzalez also said Padilla hadn't been one of the agreed-upon search custodians, so her emails fell out of the scope of discovery.
But Cooper states in his report there are “two main reasons why an exclusive focus on the use of search terms is inappropriate for determining whether the Jacobs letter should have been produced.” The first is that Uber and Waymo never agreed to limit their search to documents that included the search terms.
The second is that search terms weren't necessary to find the letter sent from Jacobs' lawyer to Padilla, one of the highest ranking lawyers at Uber, a letter that resulted in a $7.5 million settlement and was discussed with then-GC Salle Yoo and then-CEO Travis Kalanick.
Jacobs' resignation email, which was sent before the May 5 letter, also sat in the inboxes of both Yoo and Kalanick, Cooper points out. The email holds similar allegations to the letter, but with less detail. Kalanick was a custodian whose emails fell under the search terms.
Cooper stated in the report that search terms are only necessary when trying to find a needle in a haystack.
But “this needle was in Uber's hands the whole time,” he wrote.
The Jacobs letter, which alleges that Uber spied on competitors, bragged about stealing Waymo trade secrets and used ephemeral messaging to delete the evidence, was “not stowed away in a large volume of data on some server,” Cooper wrote. “They [Jacobs' letter and resignation email] were not stashed in some low-level employee's files.”
Cooper goes on to specifically call out Padilla, who testified on Nov. 29 that she passed the Jacobs letter on to Joe Spiegler and Sidney Majalya, lawyers on Uber's in-house compliance team, upon receiving it via email. Padilla said she didn't give the letter to in-house or outside counsel involved in the Waymo case because Spiegler and Majalya told her it would obstruct an internal investigation of its allegations made by Jacobs.
She testified in November that she also didn't pass the email and its allegations along because she believed it would eventually turn up in Waymo's search terms regardless.
Padilla has previously stated Uber's failure to produce the Jacobs' letter earlier was not a cover-up, as she voluntarily submitted the document to the Northern District of California U.S. attorney.
In a rare move, the U.S. attorney sent the evidentiary document along to U.S. District Judge William Alsup of the Northern District of California, who is overseeing the Waymo case. Alsup said that was the first time such a transmission of evidence has happened in this court, and implied that Padilla was attempting to hide the information by sending it to the AG rather than the parties involved in the Waymo case.
It's a claim Padilla has denied.
The full text of the Jacobs letter, though read in part by both Uber and Waymo's legal teams during pretrial hearings in November, was unsealed late Friday afternoon.
The trial, originally scheduled to begin in October, has been delayed by Alsup, who has been highly critical of Uber's handling of the Jacobs letter throughout ongoing pretrial hearings in the case. Alsup asked Cooper to draw up Friday's report following the last pretrial hearing in the case.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLatham Adds Former Treasury Department Lawyer for Cross-Border Deal Guidance
2 minute readLaw Firms Expand Scope of Immigration Expertise Amid Blitz of Trump Orders
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Eight Years On, A&O Shearman’s Fuse Legal Tech Incubator is Still Evolving
- 2Google Makes Appeal to Overturn Jury Verdict Branding the Play Store as an Illegal Monopoly
- 3First Amendment Litigator Returns to Gibson Dunn
- 4In Record Year for Baker Botts, Revenue Up 11.8%, PEP Up 17.6%
- 5Loopholes, DNA Collection and Tech: Does Your Consent as a User of a Genealogy Website Override Another Person’s Fourth Amendment Right?
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250