Perfect 10 Inc v. Google Inc et al

Filing 353

JOINT REPORT of Proposal Regarding Discovery Master filed by Plaintiff Perfect 10 Inc. (Mausner, Jeffrey)

Perfect 10 Inc v. Google Inc et al

Doc. 35

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

JEFFREY N. MAUSNER (State Bar No. 122385) Law Offices of Jeffrey N. Mausner Warner Center Towers, Suite 910 21800 Oxnard Street Woodland Hills, California 91367-3640 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Plaintiff Perfect 10, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA PERFECT 10, INC., a California corporation, Plaintiff, v. GOOGLE INC., a corporation; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Defendant. ______________________________ PERFECT 10, INC., a California corporation, Plaintiff, v. AMAZON, INC., a corporation; A9.COM, INC., a corporation; ALEXA INTERNET, INC, a corporation; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants. CV05-4753 AHM (SHx) JOINT PROPOSAL REGARDING DISCOVERY MASTER Case No.: CV04-9484 AHM (SHx)

51320/2625518.2

Joint Proposal Regarding Discovery Master

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

PERFECT 10, INC., a California corporation, Plaintiff, v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Defendant.

CV07-5156 AHM (SHx)

Pursuant to the Court's Order of August 20, 2008, the parties jointly recommend the following judge to act as Discovery Master in these matters: (1) Judge Dickran M. Tevrizian, retired United States District Judge, Central District of California, currently at JAMS. http://www.jamsadr.com/neutrals/Bio.asp?NeutralID=1920 Judge Tevrizian (ret.) is available to take the appointment. The parties have made considerable efforts to identify candidates for appointment as Discovery Master who are qualified under the Court's stated criteria, available to take the position, free of conflicts, and acceptable to all parties. Many potential candidates were ultimately found unavailable, however, because they are not accepting appointments in discovery matters, or because of conflicts. As such, the parties have to date reached agreement only on Judge Tevrizian (ret.) as a proposed candidate. The parties will continue to make further inquiries to identify additional candidates for the appointment, and will continue to attempt to reach agreement thereon. Google Inc., Amazon.com, Inc., Alexa Internet, A9.com, Inc., and Microsoft Corporation agree and believe that the fees of the appointed Discovery Master should be split equally between the parties to the disputed matter or motion, except that the Discovery Master may apportion fees differently if it is determined that one party has taken an unreasonable position with respect to the particular issue. For example, in a motion by Google against Perfect 10, each would pay half the

51320/2625518

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

discovery master's fees, and the other defendants would not be responsible for any discovery master fees. Perfect 10, Inc. objects to this proposed method of apportioning fees, and to the defendants raising this issue at the last minute. Perfect 10 believes this would constitute a change in the fee-splitting procedure that it understood was contemplated by the Court ­ one-fourth for each of the defendants (or one-third each if the Discovery Master was not going to be appointed in the Microsoft case). Perfect 10 believes that requiring Perfect 10 to pay one half of the fees of the Discovery Master, which is what the defendants now seem to be proposing, would simply be overly burdensome and unfair to Perfect 10. If the Court is contemplating such a change in the way fees are allocated, Perfect 10 requests to be heard on this subject. Finally, Microsoft Corporation joins in the proposal of Judge Tevrizian (ret.) without conceding the necessity for appointment of a Discovery Master in its case, Perfect 10, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation, Case No. 07-cv-5156 AHM (SHx). Respectfully submitted, Dated: September 4, 2008 LAW OFFICES OF JEFFREY N. MAUSNER By: /s/ Jeffrey N. Mausner____________ Jeffrey N. Mausner Attorneys for Plaintiff Perfect 10, Inc. Dated: September 4, 2008 TOWNSEND & TOWNSEND & CREW

By: /s/ Mark T. Jansen (with permission)__ Mark T. Jansen Attorneys for Defendants Amazon.com, Inc., A9.com, Inc., and Alexa Internet

51320/2625518

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Dated: September 4, 2008

WINSTON & STRAWN, LLP

By: /s/ Andrew P. Bridges (with permission)_ Andrew P. Bridges Attorneys for Defendant Microsoft Corporation Dated: September 4, 2008 QUINN EMANUEL

By: /s/ Michael T. Zeller (with permission)__ Michael Zeller Attorneys for Defendant Google, Inc.

51320/2625518