WP Engine, Inc. V. WordPress Parties  🔗 **Source:** [WP Engine, Inc. V. WordPress Parties](https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.437474/gov.uscourts.cand.437474.287.0.pdf) > [!note]+ Document Notes > # ⚖️ WP Engine v. Automattic — Dkt. 287: Joint Letter Brief — privilege over a single redacted sentence (Yuan slide deck) > **Case:** WPEngine, Inc. v. Automattic Inc., Matthew Mullenweg, WooCommerce Inc. & WordPress Foundation — N.D. Cal. No. 4:24-cv-06917-AMO (Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín; discovery before Mag. J. Ajay S. Krishnan). Late-May-2026 discovery-phase filing (fact discovery closed May 14, 2026). > **Filing:** Joint discovery letter brief · By: both sides · May 2026 > ## Summary > WPE defends privilege over one redacted sentence in a challenged slide deck: it logged the sentence as legal analysis of in-house counsel Chad Costello and submitted a sworn declaration from the deck's author Victor Yuan confirming it reflects Costello's legal advice. WPE argues Defendants' motion to compel — on speculation that the sentence is 'business strategy' — disrespects FRCP 1 over a single sentence in a 10-page deck. > ## Key points > - Privilege log + author declaration support the single-sentence redaction. > - Defendants speculate the sentence is business strategy, not legal advice. > - WPE frames it as disproportionate motion practice. > ## 🏛️ WordPress governance significance > Tests where legal advice ends and brand/business strategy begins inside WPE's rebrand materials — the boundary that determines what brand-governance reasoning becomes public. > ## 🔗 Part of > Single-sentence privilege dispute (supported by 287.1–287.6; sealed via Dkt. 288). Full text of this document omitted because this document is a PDF [Download original file →](https://readwise.io/reader/document_raw_content/458640830), WP Engine, Inc. V. WordPress Parties, Dore, Heather Brunner, Victor Yuan, 01ksftt5afze2fg505wdw2j5pf.