The opinion
S TIN G S Application GRANTED. For the reasons stated herein, pursuant
to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 43(a), the Court finds good
cause to permit Ms. Swale to testify remotely at trial.
(212) 318-6046 The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 311.
kennethgage@paulhastings.com
SO ORDERED. fe
S ber 18. 202 Usbe SDN¥
eptember 18, 2023 DOCUMENT
VIA ECF * Koarden, ELECTRONICALLY FILED
Hon. Jennifer H. Rearden J H. Rearden. U.S.DJ DOW Fy.
U.S. District Court, S.D.NLY. ee DATE FILED: 9/19/2023
Date: Sept. 19, 2023 □□ rennin
Re: Uiku Rowe v. Google LLC, Case No. 1:19-cv-08655-JHR
Dear Judge Rearden:
We represent Google LLC (“Google”) in this matter. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
43(a), we respectfully request leave for Google witness Jess Swale to testify remotely at the trial scheduled
to commence on October 4, 2023. We have conferred with Plaintiff and she does not oppose the requested
relief.
I. Factual Background
Jess Swale is an Administrative Business Partner at Google who resides in California. Google
designated her as a witness to testify about, inter alia, her interactions with Plaintiff. She was not deposed
in this case. Ms. Swale is undergoing medical treatments that will require frequent and sometimes
unscheduled visits to her doctor’s office in California through October 2023, which requires her to remain
in the area during this timeframe. Ms. Swale has provided Google with a letter from her doctor to support
this request. Should the Court wish to review the letter, Google respectfully requests that it make the letter
available for in camera inspection to preserve the confidentiality of Ms. Swale’s medical information.
Il. Good cause exists to permit Ms. Swale to testify remotely.
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide that “[flor good cause in compelling circumstances
and with appropriate safeguards, the court may permit testimony in open court by contemporaneous
transmission from a different location.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 43(a). Appropriate safeguards are ensured by
modern videoconference technology, which “allows for live synchronized audio and visual feeds... .”
Castillo Frias v. Martinez, No. 19-cv-2792, 2021 WL 2661093, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. June 28, 2021).
Paul Hastings LLP | 200 Park Avenue | New York, NY 10166
Hon. Jennifer H. Rearden
September 18, 2023
Page 2
Good cause exists to permit Ms. Swale to testify remotely, because she has “reported [a] health
condition[] imposing significant restrictions on [her] ability to travel to court... .” Sawant v. Ramsey, No.
07-cv-980, 2012 WL 1605450, at *3 (D. Conn. May 8, 2012) (granting motion to permit remote testimony
pending movants’ submission of “letters from their respective doctors indicating that they remain unable to
attend trial and listing the reasons for the restriction on their ability to travel”).
ll. Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, Google respectfully requests that this Court permit Ms. Swale to testify
remotely at trial. We thank the Court for its consideration.
Respectfully submitted,
/ : AT
Kenneth W. Gage
PAUL HASTINGS LLP