Declaration of Michael Dore
🔗 **Source:** [Declaration of Michael Dore](https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.437474/gov.uscourts.cand.437474.285.1.pdf)
> [!note]+ Document Notes
> tags: [attorney-client-privilege, discovery-dispute, automattic-slack, trademark-strategy, clawback-notice, deposition-exhibit, wp-engine-automattic, wordpress-governance]
> author: Michael Dore (Gibson Dunn)
> source: CourtListener RECAP - N.D. Cal. 4:24-cv-06917-AMO
> filing_type: declaration
> docket: 285.1
>
> # 🏷️ Automattic's Privilege Clawback Declaration on Internal "Trademark-WPE-Privileged" Slack Channel
>
> # 🧭 Table of Contents
> - [References](#-references)
> - [Summary](#-summary)
> - [Main Content](#-main-content)
> - [Paraphrase](#-paraphrase)
> - [Governance Digest](#-governance-digest)
> - [Hypotheses](#-hypotheses)
> - [Methodology](#-methodology)
> - [Questions](#-questions)
> - [Future Research](#-future-research)
> - [Implications](#-implications)
> - [Learning Styles Assessment](#-learning-styles-assessment)
> - [Accessibility Assessment](#-accessibility-assessment)
> - [DEIB Assessment](#-deib-assessment)
> - [Logical Validity](#-logical-validity)
> - [DARVO Analysis](#-darvo-analysis)
> - [Conclusion](#-conclusion)
> - [Refactor Appendix](#-refactor-appendix)
>
> # 🔗 References
> - **Docket 285.1**: Declaration of Michael Dore
> - **FRCP 26(b)(5)**: Privilege claims and clawback procedures
> - **FRE 502**: Attorney-client privilege waiver protections
> - **Bates A8C00706108-A8C00706110**: Disputed Slack communications
> - **April 23, 2026**: Mark Davies deposition
> - **April 30, 2026**: Formal clawback notice
>
> # 📝 Summary
> Gibson Dunn partner Michael Dore declares that Automattic accidentally produced attorney-client privileged Slack communications from a channel named "trademark-wpeprivileged" containing strategy discussions about WP Engine. When WP Engine's counsel used the document as a deposition exhibit, Dore immediately clawed it back and sent formal notice. This reveals Automattic maintained dedicated privileged channels for trademark strategy against WP Engine involving General Counsel Jordan Hinkes and former in-house counsel Neil Peretz. The dispute centers on whether the entire 3-page Slack thread is privileged versus just one previously-redacted message about a presentation (all 21 versions of which Automattic has withheld). This filing exposes the depth of Automattic's legal planning against WP Engine and tests privilege boundaries for modern workplace communications.
>
> # 📖 Main Content
>
<!-- deep-read:sections start -->
## 🗒️ Notes
**Privilege Dispute Context**
- Document: 3-page Slack thread from July 24, 2024
- Channel: "trademark-wpeprivileged" (Automattic internal)
- Original production: Only redacted one message of twelve
- Current claim: Entire document privileged
**Key Players in Slack Channel**
- Jordan Hinkes (Automattic General Counsel)
- Neil Peretz (former Automattic in-house counsel)
- CFO (unnamed)
- Two in-house counsel (unnamed)
**Discovery Timeline**
- July 24, 2024: Original Slack communications
- Initial production: Partial redaction of one message
- April 23, 2026: Document used in Mark Davies deposition
- April 30, 2026: Formal clawback notice sent
- May 20, 2026: This privilege declaration filed
**Related Withheld Materials**
- 21 versions of presentation referenced in Slack
- All versions claimed as attorney-client privileged
# 📚 References
- Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP representation of Automattic/Mullenweg
- Automattic internal Slack workspace documentation
- Federal privilege clawback procedures
# 🗣️ Paraphrase
**What Happened**: Automattic's lawyers accidentally gave WP Engine's lawyers a Slack conversation from a private channel where Automattic was planning trademark strategy against WP Engine. When WP Engine tried to use it in a deposition, Automattic's lawyer immediately said "wait, that's privileged" and took it back.
**The Channel**: Automattic had a Slack channel specifically named "trademark-wpeprivileged" where their lawyers and executives discussed legal strategy about WP Engine. The conversation involved their top legal people including General Counsel Jordan Hinkes.
**The Fight**: Originally Automattic only blacked out one part of the conversation, but now they want to hide the whole thing. They're also hiding 21 different versions of some presentation that was mentioned in the chat.
# 📰 Governance Digest
Automattic maintained a dedicated Slack channel called "trademark-wpeprivileged" for coordinating legal strategy against WP Engine, involving their General Counsel and C-suite executives. When this internal planning document accidentally got handed over to WP Engine and used in a deposition, Automattic's lawyers quickly yanked it back claiming privilege. The existence of such a specifically-named channel suggests Automattic was treating its conflict with WP Engine as a significant legal operation requiring dedicated secure communications. For the WordPress community, this reveals how trademark disputes over the WordPress ecosystem are being planned and coordinated at the highest levels of Automattic, with formal legal processes governing what was once a more informal open-source governance structure.
# 🧪 Hypotheses
1. **Dedicated War Room**: Automattic established formal legal planning infrastructure specifically for the WP Engine conflict, suggesting long-term strategic coordination rather than reactive responses.
2. **Privilege Creep**: Automattic is expanding its privilege claims post-production, potentially testing whether entire business communications can be shielded if lawyers participate.
3. **Multi-Version Strategy**: The 21 withheld presentation versions indicate iterative legal strategy development, suggesting extensive planning for the "nuclear war" campaign.
4. **Executive Legal Integration**: CFO participation in privileged channels suggests trademark strategy was integrated into core business operations, not just legal department activity.
5. **Channel Naming Convention**: The "trademark-wpeprivileged" naming suggests Automattic has systematic privileged communication channels for different legal matters.
# 📊 Methodology
**Evidentiary Basis**: Personal knowledge declaration by lead counsel Michael Dore based on direct participation in discovery process and investigation with Automattic's General Counsel Jordan Hinkes. Dore declares competency to testify and personal observation of deposition events. Investigation included review of Slack channel participants and communication circumstances.
# ❓ Questions
1. What other privileged Slack channels does Automattic maintain and how are they structured?
2. How long was the "trademark-wpeprivileged" channel active and what is its full communication history?
3. What are the contents of the 21 withheld presentation versions and how do they show strategy evolution?
4. Did similar privileged channels exist for other WordPress ecosystem conflicts or trademark decisions?
5. How does the court handle privilege claims over business communications in collaborative platforms like Slack?
6. What role did the CFO play in trademark strategy that would justify privilege protection?
# 🔮 Future Research
**Litigation Threads**
- Court ruling on scope of privilege for Slack communications
- Additional clawback disputes over Automattic internal communications
- Discovery of other privileged channels and their purposes
**WordPress Governance**
- Automattic's systematic approach to trademark enforcement
- Integration of legal strategy with WordPress.org governance decisions
- Role of WordPress Foundation in trademark planning discussions
# 💡 Implications
**Practice**: Establishes precedent for privilege protection of collaborative workspace communications involving lawyers, affecting how open-source organizations structure internal legal discussions.
**Policy**: Reveals formal legal infrastructure behind WordPress trademark decisions, suggesting community governance is more legally-driven than previously apparent.
**Security**: Demonstrates need for clear privilege protocols in modern workplace communication tools to prevent inadvertent disclosure of legal strategy.
**Education**: Shows WordPress community that trademark decisions involve extensive legal planning and coordination, not just technical or community considerations.
**Funding**: Indicates significant legal resources devoted to ecosystem conflicts, affecting how resources are allocated between development and legal activities.
# 🧠 Learning Styles Assessment
**Visual**: Clear document structure with numbered paragraphs and formal legal formatting supports visual learners through organized information hierarchy.
**Aural**: Legal declaration format supports reading aloud with formal, structured language patterns.
**Verbal**: Technical legal terminology requires strong vocabulary but follows standard privilege law concepts.
**Kinesthetic**: Document interaction through deposition exhibit handling provides concrete procedural context.
**Logical**: Sequential timeline and cause-effect relationships between discovery, deposition, and clawback procedures.
**Social**: Multiple parties (lawyers, in-house counsel, executives) show collaborative decision-making context.
**Solitary**: Individual attorney's personal knowledge declaration allows independent analysis of privilege claims.
**Naturalistic**: Pattern recognition in legal procedure categorization and privilege claim structures.
**Reading Level**: Legal professional (graduate-level vocabulary and complex procedural concepts).
# 📊 Accessibility Assessment
**Structure**: Well-formatted with clear headings, numbered paragraphs, and logical organization supporting screen readers. Standard court document formatting with consistent typography.
**Artifacts**: Minimal formatting artifacts from electronic filing system. Clean text extraction with proper paragraph breaks and legal citation formatting.
**WCAG 2.2 AA**: Text-based document with sufficient contrast and clear heading hierarchy would meet accessibility standards in digital format.
# 🌍 DEIB Assessment
**Cultural Breadth**: Standard U.S. federal court legal language without cultural assumptions beyond legal system familiarity.
**Inclusive Language**: Formal legal terminology is professional but may exclude non-legally-trained community members from full comprehension.
**Neurodiversity Support**: Clear structure and numbered organization supports diverse cognitive processing styles, though legal complexity remains challenging.
**Representation**: Document represents corporate legal perspective without community voice representation in privilege determinations.
**Psychological Safety**: Adversarial legal context creates inherent tension, but professional tone maintains respect between opposing counsel.
# ✅ Logical Validity
**Strong Reasoning**: Clear chronological progression from document production through deposition discovery to clawback procedures follows established legal protocols.
**Fallacies**: None detected - straightforward factual declaration without argumentative claims subject to logical fallacy analysis.
**Tone**: Professional, declarative legal tone appropriate for privilege dispute context without inflammatory language or personal attacks.
# 🛡️ DARVO Analysis
Not applicable to this source - this is a procedural discovery declaration about privilege claims rather than substantive dispute allegations involving victim-offender dynamics.
# 🎯 Conclusion
This declaration reveals Automattic's sophisticated legal infrastructure for trademark strategy against WP Engine, including dedicated privileged communication channels and extensive presentation development. The immediate clawback attempt suggests highly sensitive strategic planning that Automattic seeks to protect. The court's ruling on this privilege claim will establish important precedent for collaborative platform communications and determine how much of Automattic's internal trademark strategy becomes visible to WP Engine and the broader WordPress community.
**Watch Next**: Court ruling on privilege scope and any additional clawback disputes over Automattic's internal planning documents.
# 🧱 Refactor Appendix
## 📚 Literature Atoms
> [!quote] "The full document reflects communications on July 24, 2024 on the Automattic internal Slack channel titled 'trademark-wpeprivileged.'"
> [!quote] "Mr. Hinkes, along with former Automattic in-house counsel Neil Peretz, were participants in the Slack channel as of July 24, 2024."
> [!quote] "I am informed by members of our team that all 21 versions of this referenced presentation have been withheld as attorney-client privileged."
> [!quote] "After taking a break in the deposition to review the document further and undertake an initial investigation of the circumstances of its creation, I clawed the document back as attorney-client privileged."
#### 🧠 Permanent Candidates
- Privilege protection for collaborative platform communications
- Systematic legal channel organization in corporate environments
- Clawback procedures in modern discovery practice
- Integration of legal strategy with business operations
- Multi-version document development in legal planning
## ✏️ Fleeting Queue
- Connection between CFO involvement and business impact of trademark strategy
- Relationship between channel naming conventions and privilege claims
- Temporal evolution from partial to full privilege assertions
- Role of in-house versus outside counsel in privilege determinations
<!-- deep-read:sections end -->
📄 **Full text:** ![[Full Document Contents/Articles/Declaration of Michael Dore-3.md|Declaration of Michael Dore by Michael H. Dore, Jessie Levin]]
## Highlights
- 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 4. The document identified by Bates numbers A8C00706108 through A8C00706110 was introduced by counsel for WP Engine as an exhibit during the April 23, 2026 deposition of Mark Davies. When introduced, I reviewed the document and noted the names of Automattic in-house counsel in the list of names on the first page of the document. After taking a break in the deposition to review the document further and undertake an initial investigation of the circumstances of its creation, I clawed the document back as attorney-client privileged. Defendants sent WP Engine a formal Clawback Notice on April 30, 2026. ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01ksfvh5e9mqpys1v7gp12ef32))
- Note: Docket 285.1: Hinkes declaration — clawback of A8C00706108 after Davies deposition.
- Tags: legal, wp-engine-automattic