In re: High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation

Filing 420

Order by Hon. Lucy H. Koh granting 371 Stipulation Regarding Document Admissibility and Authentication.(lhklc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/14/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Robert A. Mittelstaedt (State Bar No. 60359) ramittelstaedt@jonesday.com Craig A. Waldman (State Bar No. 229943) cwaldman@jonesday.com David C. Kiernan (State Bar No. 215335) dkiernan@jonesday.com Lin W. Kahn (State Bar No. 261387) linkahn@jonesday.com Peter A. Julian (State Bar No. 277673) pjulian@jonesday.com JONES DAY 555 California Street, 26th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 626-3939 Facsimile: (415) 875-5700 10 Attorneys for Defendant Adobe Systems Inc. 11 [Additional counsel listed on signature page] 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 13 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION 14 15 16 IN RE: HIGH-TECH EMPLOYEE ANTITRUST LITIGATION 17 THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: 18 ALL ACTIONS Master Docket No. 11-CV-2509-LHK STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING DOCUMENT ADMISSIBILITY AND AUTHENTICATION 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Regarding Document Admissibility and Authentication Master Docket No. 11-CV-2509-LHK 1 The individual and representative plaintiffs Siddharth Hariharan, Brandon Marshall, 2 Michael Devine, Mark Fichtner, and Daniel Stover (“Plaintiffs”) and defendants Adobe Systems 3 Inc., Apple Inc., Google Inc., Intel Corp., Intuit Inc., Lucasfilm Ltd., and Pixar (“Defendants”), 4 by and through the undersigned counsel, hereby enter into this Stipulation, subject to court 5 approval, with reference to the following facts: 6 7 WHEREAS, the parties have collectively produced in excess of 340,000 documents in this case, amounting to more than 1,825,000 pages; 8 9 10 WHEREAS, on February 27, 2013, Plaintiffs served on each Defendant Requests for Admissions and the Third Set of Interrogatories regarding the authenticity and admissibility of documents produced in this case; 11 WHEREAS, on March 12, 2013, Plaintiffs served on Defendants deposition notices 12 pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6), seeking testimony related to, among other 13 things, the authenticity and admissibility of documents produced in this case; 14 WHEREAS, the fact discovery cutoff is March 29, 2013; 15 ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, SUBJECT TO COURT APPROVAL, 16 that: 17 1. Plaintiffs withdraw the 30(b)(6) deposition notices served March 12, 2013. 18 2. Plaintiffs withdraw the February 27, 2013 Requests for Admissions and Third Set 19 of Interrogatories. 20 3. Except as provided herein, all documents produced by Plaintiffs or Defendants in 21 this case bearing a bates number are authentic true and correct copies of documents within the 22 possession, custody or control of the producing party, and the metadata and email header 23 information produced by Plaintiffs or Defendants accurately reflects the senders, recipients and/or 24 custodians of email and other documents. 25 4. Plaintiffs and Defendants reserve the right to challenge the authenticity of specific 26 documents and their associated metadata after another party identifies them for use in this case. If 27 a party challenges the authenticity of a document, the producing party will permit appropriate 28 discovery on the limited issue of authenticity of that specific document, without regard to the fact -2- Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Regarding Document Admissibility and Authentication Master Docket No. 11-CV-2509-LHK 1 2 discovery cutoff date. 5. Plaintiffs and Defendants will provide a list of documents that they request the 3 parties stipulate are business records pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 803(6). For any such 4 documents that any party declines to so stipulate, the producing party will permit appropriate 5 discovery on the limited issue of whether that specific document meets the business record 6 requirements of Rule 803(6), without regard to the discovery cutoff date. 7 6. The parties will agree to a schedule for the timing of the Plaintiffs’ and 8 Defendants’ identification of documents they intend to use and documents they request producing 9 parties stipulate are business records, the producing parties’ response, and any related discovery. 10 7. Documents whose authenticity and business records status has been established 11 pursuant to this stipulation can be introduced into evidence without calling at trial a custodian of 12 the document as a sponsoring witness. 13 14 15 16 17 18 8. By entering into this stipulation, the parties hereby preserve and do not waive any other objections that they may have to the admissibility of a particular document. 9. Except as provided herein, this stipulation does not otherwise affect the schedule for the case. Dated: March 28, 2013 19 LIEFF, CABRASER, HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP By: 20 21 /s/ Kelly M. Dermody KELLY M. DERMODY Attorneys for individual and representative Plaintiffs Siddharth Hariharan, Brandon Marshall, Michael Devine, Mark Fichtner, and Daniel Stover 22 23 24 25 26 Dated: March 28, 2013 JOSEPH SAVERI LAW FIRM By: /s/ Joseph Saveri JOSEPH SAVERI Attorneys for individual and representative Plaintiffs Siddharth Hariharan, Brandon Marshall, Michael Devine, Mark Fichtner, and Daniel Stover 27 28 -3- Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Regarding Document Admissibility and Authentication Master Docket No. 11-CV-2509-LHK 1 Dated: March 28, 2013 2 O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP By: 3 4 5 6 Dated: March 28, 2013 7 KEKER & VAN NEST LLP By: 8 9 10 Dated: March 28, 2013 /s/ Michael F. Tubach MICHAEL F. TUBACH Attorneys for Defendant APPLE INC. /s/ Daniel Purcell DANIEL PURCELL Attorneys for Defendant LUCASFILM LTD. JONES DAY 11 By: 12 13 /s/ David C. Kiernan DAVID C. KIERNAN Attorneys for Defendant ADOBE SYSTEMS INC. 14 15 Dated: March 28, 2013 16 MAYER BROWN LLP By: 17 18 19 Dated: March 28, 2013 /s/ Lee H. Rubin LEE H. RUBIN Attorneys for Defendant GOOGLE INC. BINGHAM McCUTCHEN LLP 20 By: 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Dated: March 28, 2013 /s/ Frank Hinman Frank Hinman Attorneys for Defendant INTEL CORPORATION JONES DAY By: /s/ Robert A. Mittelstaedt ROBERT A. MITTELSTAEDT Attorneys for Defendant INTUIT INC. 28 -4- Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Regarding Document Admissibility and Authentication Master Docket No. 11-CV-2509-LHK 1 2 3 4 Dated: March 28, 2013 COVINGTON & BURLING LLP By: /s/ Emily Johnson Henn EMILY JOHNSON HENN Attorneys for Defendant PIXAR 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -5- Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Regarding Document Admissibility and Authentication Master Docket No. 11-CV-2509-LHK 1 Filer’s Attestation 2 I attest under penalty of perjury that concurrence in the filing of the document has been obtained 3 from all the signatories. 4 5 /s/ Robert Mittelstaedt Robert Mittelstaedt Jones Day Dated: March 28, 2013 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -6- Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Regarding Document Admissibility and Authentication Master Docket No. 11-CV-2509-LHK 1 PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 2 3 May 14, 2013 Dated: ______________________ 4 __________________________________ HON. LUCY H. KOH UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 5 6 SFI-819904v5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -7- Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Regarding Document Admissibility and Authentication Master Docket No. 11-CV-2509-LHK