Gary Black, et al v. Google, Inc.

Filing 5

Filed (ECF) Appellee Google, Inc. response to motion (,to stay lower court action). Date of service: 09/23/2010. [7484860] (BEV)

Download PDF
Gary Black, et al v. Google, Inc. Doc. 5 Att. 1 NO. 10-16992 _________________________________________________________________ UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT _________________________________________________________________ GARY BLACK AND HOLLI BEAM-BLACK Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. GOOGLE INC. Defendant/Appellee. _________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Case No. 4:10-cv-02381-CW The Honorable Claudia Wilken _________________________________________________________________ DECLARATION OF BART E. VOLKMER IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT-APPELLEE GOOGLE INC.'S RESPONSE TO APPELLANTS' MOTION TO STAY _________________________________________________________________ David H. Kramer, State Bar No. 168452 Bart E. Volkmer, State Bar No. 223732 WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI Professional Corporation 650 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050 (650) 493-9300 Attorneys for Defendant/Appellee Google Inc. I, Bart E. Volkmer, declare as follows: I am licensed to practice law in the State of California and am admitted to practice before this Court. I am an associate at the law firm of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, counsel of record for Defendant-Appellee Google Inc. ("Google") in this action. I submit this declaration in support of Google's Response to the Appellants' Motion to Stay. I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth herein and, if called as a witness, I would testify competently to them. 1. On May 28, 2010, Gary Black and Holli Beam-Black filed suit against Google in the Northern District of California. A true and correct of the Blacks' Complaint is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 2. On August 13, 2010, the district court dismissed the Blacks' Complaint with prejudice pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) ("Dismissal Order"). A true and correct of the Dismissal Order is attached hereto as Exhibit B. 3. On August 25, 2010, the Blacks filed in the district court a paper entitled "Objection." 4. On September 10, 2010, the Blacks filed in the district court a motion to stay the Dismissal Order. A true and correct copy of that motion is attached hereto as Exhibit C. 5. On September 20, 2010, the district court denied the Blacks' "Objection" and denied their motion to stay. A true and correct copy of that Order is attached hereto as Exhibit D. -1- I declare under penalty of perjury of the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 23rd day of September 2010, at Palo Alto, California. /s/ Bart E. Volkmer Bart E. Volkmer -2-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?