Watkins Family Trust Dated 1/7/94 v. WB (Brant) Wallace, et al.

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 WATKINS FAMILY TRUST DATED Case No. 24-cv-02785-JSC 1/7/94, 8 Plaintiff, ORDER RE: MOTION TO HAVE 9 WITNESSES APPEAR BY ZOOM v. 10 Re: Dkt. No. 79 WB (BRANT) WALLACE, et al., 11 Defendants. 12 13 Pending before the Court is Defendants’ motion to have two non-party witnesses, Mr. 14 Haddock and Mr. Webb, testify via video at the upcoming bench trial. (Dkt. No. 79.) Plaintiff 15 opposes the motion. After considering the parties’ submissions, the Court concludes oral 16 argument is not required. See N.D. Cal. Civ. L.R.…