Mobley v. Workday, Inc.

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DEREK L. MOBLEY, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
WORKDAY, INC.,
Defendant.
Case No. 23-cv-00770-RFL
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
RELIEF FROM NONDISPOSITIVE
PRETRIAL ORDER OF
MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Re: Dkt. No. 403
Having reviewed Magistrate Judge Beeler’s Discovery Order (Dkt. No. 394 (“Order”)),
Plaintiffs’ Motion for Relief (Dkt. No. 403), and the docket in this case, the Court finds that the
Order is well-reasoned and is not clearly erroneous or contrary to law. Judge Beeler reasonably
concluded that “plaintiffs have not met their burden of showing that Workday has actual
possession of its customers’ data where it resides on segregated, password-protected customer
tenants that Workday is contractually prohibited from freely accessing.” (Order at 2; see also
Dkt. No. 108 ¶ 21 (“Workday cannot access its customers’ data absent customer permission”
because of “physical and contractual limitations”); Dkt. No 352-3 at 12 (defining “Tenant”).)1
To be clear, the Order denies the motion to compel customer data that Workday has
described as stored in password-protected customer tenants. To the extent the Motion seeks
relief from the Order based on Plaintiffs’ request for data in the form of aggregated anonymized
statistics that Workday uses for its own purposes, that does not appear to be the “customers’
applicant data” over which Workday says it lacks possession, custody, or control, and thus is not
the customer data that has been determined to be outside the scope of discovery by Judge
1 Citations to page numbers refer to ECF pagination.
Case 3:23-cv-00770-RFL Document 407 Filed 07/28/26 Page 1 of 2

2
Beeler. (See Dkt. No. 315 at 25 (describing such aggregate statistical data as providing
summary-level insights, not disputing Workday’s contractual or technical ability to access it, and
objecting only on relevance grounds); Dkt. No. 340 at 5 (rejecting Workday’s relevance
arguments).)
Accordingly, the Motion for Relief is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 28, 2026
RITA F. LIN
United States District Judge
Case 3:23-cv-00770-RFL Document 407 Filed 07/28/26 Page 2 of 2