LegalZoom.com Inc v. Rocket Lawyer Incorporated

Filing 161

REPLY MOTION for Sanctions Under Rule 11; Memorandum of Points and Authorities with Redactions 127 filed by Plaintiff LegalZoom.com Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Aaron Allan)(Heather, Fred)

t PATRICIA L. GLASER -State Bar No. 55668
pgl_aser glaserweil.com
2 FRED .HEATHER -State Bar No. 110650
(heather glaserweil.com
3 AARO~.ALLAN -State Bar No. 144406
aallan glaserweil.com
4 GLAS R WEIL FINK HOWARD
AVCHEN & SHAPIRO LLP
5 10250 Constellation Boulevard, 19th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90067
6 Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 310 556-2920
Attorneys for Plaintiff
LegalZoom.com, Inc.
s
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

~o

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

it

WESTERN DIVISION

~~.
~, o
~.

CASE NO.: CV 12-9942-GAF(AGE)

o ~a

i a LEGALZOOM.COM,INC., a Delaware
corporation,

~' ~'

13

Hon. Gary A. Feess
Courtroom: 740

~a;~
~~
~~
_~ ~
~~~

is

Q

is

L
~~
~

°E o

~=z

Plaintiff,
v.

ROCKET LAWYER INCORPORATED,
~6 ~ a Delaware corporation,
i~

Defendant.

DECLARATION OF AARON P.
ALLAN IN SUPPORT OF REPLY
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND
AUTHORITIES TO
LEGALZOOM.COM,INC'S
MOTION FOR RULE 11
SANCTIONS

~s
19

October 27, 2014
Date:
9:30 a.m.
Time:
Courtroom: 740

20
21

Complaint Filed: November 20, 2012

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

DECLARATION OF AARON P. ALLAN RE: REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR RULE 11 SANCTIONS
954005

DECLARATION OF AARON P. ALLAN

t
2

I, AARON P. ALLAN,declare and state as follows:

3

1.

I am an attorney at law duly admitted to practice before all courts ofthe

4

State of California and am a Partner of the law firm of Glaser Weil Fink Jacobs

5

Howard Avchen &Shapiro LLP, attorneys of record herein for Plaintiff

6

LegalZoom.com,Inc.("LegalZoom"). I submit this declaration in support ofthe
Reply Memorandum of Points and Authorities to LegalZoom's Motion for Rule 11

s Sanctions. I have personal knowledge ofthe facts set forth herein, and if called upon
9

~o
>>
~~
o ~~
~~
~~g
~~
~ :~~

~; ~
-~
~~Q
~ -~
L L
~, ~

2.

Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of a letter which I

received from Rocket Lawyer's counsel Michael Jones, dated August 20, 2014, which

i2 enclosed a motion for Rule 11 sanctions that Rocket Lawyer was threatening to file in
i3 connection with LegalZoom's pending motion for partial summary judgment.
la

3.

Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of a letter dated

~s September 9, 2014, which I sent back in response to Mr. Jones' letter, stating
16 LegalZoom's disagreement with Mr. Jones' position on Rule 11 sanctions and

'~ o
~~Z

to testify thereto, I could and would competently do so under oath.

l7

is

proposing a means for the parties to avoid motion practice on that disagreement.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of

~9 ~ America and the state of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
20

Executed this 13th day of October, 2014, at Los Angeles, California.

2~
22
23

Aaron P. Allan

24
25
26
27
28

DECLARATION OF AARON P. ALLAN RE: REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR RULE 11 SANCTIONS
954005

EXHIBIT A

G OO D W I N

PROCTER

Michael T. Jones
650.752.3279
mjones~goodwinprocte r.co m

Goodwin Procter uv
Counselors at Law
135 Commonwealth Drive
Menlo Park, CA 94025-1105
T: 650.752.3100
F: 650.853.1038

August 20, 2014

VIA E-MAIL AND FEDERAL EXPRESS
Fred D. Heather([e-mail])
Aaron P. Allan ([e-mail])
Barak Vaughn ([e-mail])
Glaser Weil Fink Jacobs Howard Avchen &Shapiro t,t,P
10250 Constellation Boulevard, 19th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Re:

LegalZoom.com,Inc. v. Rocket Lawyer Incorporated —Motionfor Rule 11 Sanctions

Dear Counsel:
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(c)(2), enclosed please find Rocket Lawyer's Motion for
Rule 11 Sanctions based on the factual misrepresentations in LegalZoom's Motion for Partial Summary
Judgment and supporting declarations. Specifically, the statements relating to LegalZoom's lack of
control over the content of LegalSpring.com are directly contradicted by the documents produced by
LegalZoom and Travis Giggy in this acrion. Also enclosed is the Declaration of Michael T. Jones in
support of this Motion with accompanying exhibits, a proposed order, and a proof of service.
Under Rule 11, LegalZoom now has twenty-one (21) days in which to withdraw its Motion for Partial
Summary Judgment and declarations. Should LegalZoom decide not to withdraw these offending
documents within the twenty-one day safe harbor period, Rocket Lawyer intends to seek leave of Court
to file the enclosed Motion to seek relief from the Court.
Please let us know if you would like to discuss.
Sincerely,

Mic ael T.~ ones
Enclosures
cc:

Forrest A. Hainline III
Hong-An Vu
Brian W. Cook

EXHIBIT B

Aaron Allan
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:

Aaron Allan
Tuesday, September 09, 2014 9:00 AM
Jones, Michael T
Fred Heather
Rocket Lawyer's Rule 11 Motion
LegalZoom, Inc. v. Rocket Lawyer.pdf

Michael,
Please see the attached letter, and please call me to discuss.
Aaron P. Allan partner
Glaser Weil Fink Howard Avchen &Shapiro L!P
10250 Constellation Blvd., 19th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90067
Main: 310.553.3000 ~ Direct: 310.282.6279 ~ Fax: [phone]

~~~
~

~
~I

10250 Constellation Blvd.
19th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90067
310.553.3000 TEL
310.556.2920 FAX
Aaron P. Allan

September 9, 2014

VIA EMAIL &FEDERAL EXPRESS

Direct Dial
310.282.6279
Direct Faz
310.785.3579

Email
[e-mail]

Michael T. Jones
([e-mail])
Goodwin Procter LLP
135 Commonwealth Drive
Menlo Park, CA 94025

Re:

LegalZoom.com,Inc. v. Rocket Lawyer Incorporated —Rocket Lawyer's Motion for
Rule 11 Sanctions

Dear Michael,
I am writing in response to your letter dated August 20, 2014, which enclosed Rocket Lawyer's
Motion for Rule 11 Sanctions. We strongly disagree with the arguments upon which Rocket
Lawyer's motion is based. There is no possibility that the Court has been misled by
LegalZoom's motion for partial summazy judgment because each of the factual matters Rocket
Lawyer complains were not adequately disclosed by LegalZoom were thoroughly disclosed and
argued by Rocket Lawyer in its opposition papers. Moreover, the issue of whether LegalZoom
"did not author or control the content of Legalspring.com remains subject to competing legal
arguments by the parties. The Court can appropriately review the parties' respective briefs on
this subject and make a determination. There has been no omission of facts by LegalZoom on
this issue, and no attempt to deceive the Court.
Notwithstanding the above, and solely to avoid what we view as time wasting and unnecessary
motion practice, LegalZoom is prepared to withdraw that portion of its partial summary
judgment motion, section III.B.3, which argues for judgment based on a lack of authorship or
control of the content at Legalspring.com. The remainder of LegalZoom's motion would remain
ripe for determination by the Court.
Please let me know immediately whether this would be an acceptable means for the parties to
avoid motion practice on this issue. If it is, then LegalZoom will file an appropriate notice with
the Court which withdraws section III.B.3.

ifT MERITAS LAW FIRMS WORLDWIDE

928081.1

Michael T. Jones
Goodwin Procter LLP
September 9, 2014
Page 2

Please respond to this letter, by either calling or emailing me, before filing your motion with the
Court.
Sincerely yours,

AARON P. ALLAN
of GLASER WEIL FINK HOWARD AVCHBN & SHAPIRO LLA

APA:cc

928081.1

1

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

2

STATE OF CALIFORNIA,COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

3

I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California; I am over the
4

age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is 10250
s
Constellation Boulevard, 19th Floor, Los Angeles, California 90067.
6

On October 13, 2014, I electronically filed the following documents) using the
CM/ECF system.
s
DECLARATION OF AARON P. ALLAN IN SUPPORT OF REPLY
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES TO
io LEGALZOOM.COM,INC'S MOTION FOR RULE 11 SANCTIONS
9

>>
y 0

12

Participants in the case are registered CM/ECF users and will be served by the

.~' L
O i~
~,~
~~
~; :,~

~3 CM/ECF system.

~~~Q

15

~~
~„~; ~
~~ o
~
~”

~6 above is true and correct.

~€=

17

~a

I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this court at
'whose direction the service was made. I declare under penalty of perjury that the

Executed on October 13, 2014 at Los Angeles, California.

is
19

zo

/s/ Fred D. Heather
Fred D. Heather

z~
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

PROOF OF SERVICE
954005