Perfect 10, Inc. v. Google, Inc.

Filing 60

Filed (ECF) Appellee Google, Inc. bill of costs (Form 10) in the amount of $4,997.60 USD. Date of service: 08/16/2011 [7859709] --[COURT UPDATE: Re-ordered documents. Resent NDA. 08/16/2011 by DB] (COURT UPDATE: To attach additional costs - as requested by court; resent NDA)--[Edited 09/21/2011 by HH] (BRL)

STATEMENT REGARDING TAXING OF ADDITIONAL COSTS
In addition to the costs itemized in the accompanying standard form Bill of Costs,
Defendant-Appellee Google Inc. (“Google”) respectfully requests that the additional costs
described below be taxed against Plaintiff-Appellant Perfect 10, Inc. (“P10”) pursuant to Fed. R.
App. P. 39 and Circuit Rule 39-1.
1.

Costs for duplication of DVDs submitted with Google’s Supplemental Excerpts of
Record in the amount of $1,980.00

No. of Documents

DVDs per Document

Cost per DVD

TOTAL COST

6

22

$15.00

$1,980.00

Explanation
Circuit Rule 30-1 requires the parties to prepare excerpts of record in order “to provide
each member of the panel with those portions of the record necessary to reach a decision.” 9th
Cir. R. 30-1.1. The Rule further specifies that “the excerpts of record shall include … those
specific portions of the exhibits necessary to resolve the issue” where an issue on appeal is based
on written exhibits. 9th Cir. R. 30-1.4. P10’s appeal was based in part on the contents of its
purported DMCA notices to Google and Google’s internal records of processing DMCA notices
received from P10 and other complainants. These written documents were included as exhibits
in the record before the district court; however, P10 failed to include these critical exhibits in its
Initial Excerpts of Record. Accordingly, Google was required to submit these documents to the
Court under Circuit Rule 30-1. 9th Cir. R. 30-1.7 (“If the appellee believes that the excerpts of
record filed by the appellant exclude items which are required under this rule … the appellee
shall … submit supplemental excerpts of record, prepared pursuant to this rule, comprised of the
omitted items.”).

1

Several of P10’s DMCA notices to Google included electronic files contained on DVDs
submitted with the notices, and 21 of the 22 DVDs for which Google seeks to have duplication
costs taxed were part of the original notices and the exhibits in the record before the district
court. The other DVD contains full copies of several of Google’s internal records of processing
DMCA notices received from P10 and other complainants, which were a further subject of P10’s
appeal and included in an exhibit in the record before the district court. All 22 DVDs were
required to be included in Google’s Supplemental Excerpts of Record under Circuit Rule 30-1,
and P10 should be taxed for the reasonable cost Google incurred in duplicating them.
2.

Costs for duplication of hard drive submitted with Google’s Supplemental Excerpts
of Record in the amount of $1,500.00

No. of Documents

Hard Drive per Doc.

Cost per Hard Drive

TOTAL COST

6

1

$250.00

$1,500.00

Explanation
Circuit Rule 30-1 requires the parties to prepare excerpts of record in order “to provide
each member of the panel with those portions of the record necessary to reach a decision.” 9th
Cir. R. 30-1.1. The Rule further specifies that “the excerpts of record shall include … those
specific portions of the exhibits necessary to resolve the issue” where an issue on appeal is based
on written exhibits. 9th Cir. R. 30-1.4. P10’s appeal was based in part on the contents of its
purported DMCA notices to Google. These written documents were included as exhibits in the
record before the district court; however, P10 failed to include these critical exhibits in its Initial
Excerpts of Record. Accordingly, Google was required to submit these documents to the Court
under Circuit Rule 30-1. 9th Cir. R. 30-1.7 (“If the appellee believes that the excerpts of record
filed by the appellant exclude items which are required under this rule … the appellee shall …

2

submit supplemental excerpts of record, prepared pursuant to this rule, comprised of the omitted
items.”).
One of P10’s DMCA notices to Google came in the form of a collection of electronic
files contained on a hard drive. The hard drive was an exhibit in the record before the district
court. The hard drive was required to be included in Google’s Supplemental Excerpts of Record
under Circuit Rule 30-1, and P10 should be taxed for the reasonable cost Google incurred in
duplicating it.

Dated: August 16, 2011

Respectfully submitted,

By____________________________________
Bradley R. Love
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
SULLIVAN, LLP
Attorneys for Defendant Google Inc.

3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court for the
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit by using the appellate CM/ECF system on
August 16, 2011.
I certify that all participants in the case are registered CM/ECF users and that service will
be accomplished by the appellate CM/ECF system.
Dated: August 16, 2011

Respectfully submitted,

By____________________________________
Bradley R. Love
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
SULLIVAN, LLP
Attorneys for Defendant Google Inc.

4