Bryan Pringle v. William Adams Jr et al

Filing 177

STIPULATION to Continue trial and case management dates filed by plaintiff Bryan Pringle. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Holley, Colin)

1 Dean A. Dickie (appearing Pro Hac Vice)
[e-mail]
2 Kathleen E. Koppenhoefer (appearing Pro Hac Vice)
[e-mail]
3 MILLER, CANFIELD, PADDOCK AND STONE, P.L.C.
225 West Washington Street, Suite 2600
4 Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: [phone]
5 Facsimile: 312.460.4288

LLP

HAMPTONHOLLEY

2101 East Coast Highway, Suite 260
Corona del Mar, California 92625

6 George L. Hampton IV (State Bar No. 144433)
[e-mail]
7 Colin C. Holley (State Bar No. 191999)
[e-mail]
8 HAMPTONHOLLEY LLP
2101 East Coast Highway, Suite 260
9 Corona del Mar, California 92625
Telephone: [phone]
10 Facsimile: 949.718.4580
11 Attorneys for Plaintiff
BRYAN PRINGLE
12
13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15

SOUTHERN DIVISION
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
WILLIAM ADAMS, JR.; STACY
)
FERGUSON; ALLAN PINEDA; and
)
JAIME GOMEZ, all individually and
collectively as the music group The Black )
)
Eyed Peas, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)

16 BRYAN PRINGLE, an individual,

Case No. SACV 10-1656 JST(RZx)

17

STIPULATION REQUESTING
COURT TO CONTINUE TRIAL
AND CASE MANAGEMENT
DATES

18
19
20
21
22
23
24

This Stipulation requesting the Court to continue the trial and certain

25 remaining case management dates is respectfully submitted by plaintiff Bryan
26 Pringle (“Plaintiff”) and defendants William Adams, Stacy Ferguson, Allan Pineda,
27 Jaime Gomez, individually and collectively p/k/a The Black Eyed Peas, Tab
28 Magnetic Publishing, Headphone Junkie Publishing, LLC, will.i.am. music, llc,
1
C:\Users\cholley\Desktop\Pringle Stipulation re_ Extending all dates_2011.11.21.DOC

1 Jeepney Music, Inc., Cherry River Music Co., EMI April Music, Inc., UMG
2 Recordings, Inc., Interscope Records, Shapiro, Bernstein & Co., Inc., Frederic
3 Riesterer, and David Guetta (jointly “Defendants”) (Plaintiff and Defendants are
4 hereafter collectively referred to as the “parties”), and is made with reference to the
5 following facts:
6

1.

WHEREAS, on February 24, 2011 the Court entered an Order Vacating

7 Scheduling Conference and Setting Case Management Dates. Pursuant to the terms
8 of that Order, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of this Court,
9 the following dates were scheduled in connection with the instant litigation:
10

a.

Discovery Motions

HAMPTONHOLLEY

LLP

11
2101 East Coast Highway, Suite 260
Corona del Mar, California 92625

November 11, 2011: Last Day to Meet and Confer on Non-

12

b.

November 14, 2011: Close of Fact and Expert Discovery

13

c.

November 21, 2011: Last Day to File Motions (Other Than
Motions In Limine)

14
15

d.

Sufficiency of Fact Discovery

16
17

e.

November 28, 2011: Last Day to Conduct Settlement
Proceedings

18
19

November 23, 2011: Last Day to File Motions Regarding the

f.

November 30, 2011: Last Day for Affirmative Rule 26(a)(2)(D)
Expert Disclosures to be Made

20
21

g.

December 19, 2011: Last Day for Law And Motion Hearings

22

h.

December 30, 2011: Last Day for Rebuttal Rule 26(a)(2)(D)
Expert Disclosures

23
24

i.

January 4, 2012: Last Day for Local Rule 16-2 Meeting

25

j.

February 13, 2011: Final Pre-Trial Conference

26

k.

February 24, 2011: Exhibit Conference

27

l.

February 28, 2011: Jury Trial

28
2
C:\Users\cholley\Desktop\Pringle Stipulation re_ Extending all dates_2011.11.21.DOC

1

2.

WHEREAS, following the Court’s February 24, 2011 Scheduling

2 Order, the parties worked diligently to complete discovery within the time frame set
3 by the Court. That work included, among other things, depositions of at least nine
4 fact witnesses, responses to dozens of document requests and interrogatories, and
5 production of numerous audio files and more than 25,000 pages of documents, some
6 of which were produced as recently as November 14, 2011. The parties are in the
7 process of meeting and conferring regarding certain document production and
8 discovery issues.
9

3.

WHEREAS, upon stipulation of the parties and this Court’s Order

10 Continuing Expert Discovery Cutoff Dates Pursuant to Stipulation dated October 26,

LLP

HAMPTONHOLLEY

2101 East Coast Highway, Suite 260
Corona del Mar, California 92625

11 2011 (ECF Doc. #154), the February 24, 2011 Scheduling Order was modified to
12 shorten the time period for expert disclosures, such that initial disclosures would be
13 made by November 23, 2011, rebuttal expert disclosures would be made by
14 December 16, 2011 and expert discovery would be completed by January 16, 2012.
15

4.

WHEREAS, fact discovery closed in this case on November 14, 2011.

16 WHEREAS, on November 17, 2011, Defendants Shapiro, Bernstein & Co., Inc.,
17 David Guetta, and Frederic Riesterer filed a motion for summary judgment (ECF
18 Doc. #159) (hereafter “Defendants’ MSJ”). This Motion seeks Judgment in favor of
19 Defendants, and against Plaintiff on the following issues: (1) whether Plaintiff owns
20 a valid copyright in “Take a Dive” (Dance Version), (2) whether Plaintiff can prove
21 that any Defendant had access to, and copied from, “Take a Dive” (Dance Version),
22 (3) whether Plaintiff can prove that Defendants had access to “Take a Dive” and that
23 “Take a Dive” is substantially similar to “I Gotta Feeling,” and (4) whether
24 Plaintiff’s claim should be dismissed for spoliation of evidence.
25

5.

WHEREAS Defendants’ MSJ was set for hearing, in accordance with

26 the Court’s current scheduling order, on December 19, 2011. Based upon the issues
27 raised, a favorable defense ruling on Defendants’ MSJ would effectively terminate
28
3
C:\Users\cholley\Desktop\Pringle Stipulation re_ Extending all dates_2011.11.21.DOC

1 the proceedings with respect to all Defendants, and eliminate the necessity for
2 proceeding into the costly damages, pre-trial, and trial phases of the litigation.
3

6.

WHEREAS by operation of the Local Rules, Plaintiff’s opposition to

4 Defendants’ MSJ is currently due on November 28, 2011. Furthermore, the current
5 December 19, 2011 date for the hearing on Defendants’ MSJ is just three calendar
6 days after the deadline for disclosure of rebuttal expert reports. Plaintiff’s counsel
7 states Plaintiff intends to depose Defendants’ experts that have submitted
8 declarations in support of the Motion for Summary Judgment and to submit expert
9 declarations in opposition to Defendants’ MSJ. Plaintiff’s counsel states Plaintiff
10 needs time to depose Defendants’ experts and to have his experts prepare their

LLP

HAMPTONHOLLEY

2101 East Coast Highway, Suite 260
Corona del Mar, California 92625

11 declarations prior to submitting the opposition to Defendants’ MSJ.
12

7.

WHEREAS Plaintiff’s counsel further states that a continuance of the

13 MSJ hearing and briefing schedule is warranted because the current schedule allows
14 Plaintiff just 11 calendar days—over two weekends including the Thanksgiving
15 holiday weekend—to oppose a motion for summary judgment that is supported by 12
16 declarations (including witnesses offering expert opinions and witnesses who reside
17 outside of the United States), 111 statements of fact, and a 25-page memorandum.
18 Plaintiff’s counsel therefore states that Plaintiff needs additional time beyond the 11
19 days to prepare his opposition.
20

8.

WHEREAS Plaintiff’s counsel contacted Defendants’ counsel seeking a

21 stipulated continuance of the briefing schedule and hearing on Defendants’ MSJ.
22 Defendants and their counsel are willing to accommodate Plaintiff’s desire for
23 additional time to prepare his response. However, the parties agree that it is in their
24 interest, and interest of judicial economy, for the Court to resolve Defendants’ MSJ
25 before the parties incur significant additional fees and costs on non-liability issues,
26 such as damages and apportionment, and to prepare the various pre-trial materials
27 and for trial, all of which would be unnecessary should Defendants’ MSJ be granted.
28
4
C:\Users\cholley\Desktop\Pringle Stipulation re_ Extending all dates_2011.11.21.DOC

1

9.

WHEREAS the parties have met and conferred on Plaintiff’s request for

2 additional time to prepare a response to Defendants’ MSJ and the parties are in the
3 process of discussing the availability of their respective expert witnesses for
4 depositions following the disclosure of initial expert reports and rebuttal reports.
5 Finding dates that work for all parties and the witnesses is challenging given the
6 number of parties and the upcoming end-of-the-year holidays and travel obligations
7 of the witnesses and counsel, but the parties will continue to confer in good faith to
8 identify potential deposition dates that will work provided the MSJ hearing and
9 briefing schedule is modified as set forth below.
10

10.

WHEREAS, in addition to extension of the MSJ briefing and pretrial

LLP

HAMPTONHOLLEY

2101 East Coast Highway, Suite 260
Corona del Mar, California 92625

11 dates, the parties wish to re-open fact discovery solely for the purpose of taking the
12 Rule 30(b)(6) depositions of witness for Defendants UMG/Interscope on damages
13 issues, which depositions could not be completed prior to the fact discovery cutoff
14 because of the unavailability of the witnesses.
15

11.

WHEREAS the needed modification of the MSJ hearing and briefing

16 schedule will require a short continuance of the trial (of less than 90 days) and
17 rescheduling of the remaining pretrial deadlines. The parties have met and conferred
18 in good faith and have reached agreement on a proposed schedule that will allow for
19 the completion of expert discovery in advance of the remaining briefing of
20 Defendants’ MSJ, will defer expert discovery regarding damages and trial
21 preparation until after Defendants’ MSJ is heard, and will allow the parties adequate
22 time to prepare the case for trial should the MSJ be denied.
23

12.

WHEREAS, this is the parties’ first request for a continuance of the trial

24 date, and the parties respectfully submit that it is warranted in the interests of judicial
25 economy and avoiding any prejudice to any of the parties.
26

13.

BASED UPON THE FOREGOING FACTS, IT IS HEREBY

27 STIPULATED AND REQUESTED by and between the Parties, through their
28 respective counsel, subject to the Court’s approval, that the Court’s February 24,
5
C:\Users\cholley\Desktop\Pringle Stipulation re_ Extending all dates_2011.11.21.DOC

1 2011 and October 26, 2011 Scheduling Orders be modified as set forth in the below
2 chart:

LLP

HAMPTONHOLLEY

2101 East Coast Highway, Suite 260
Corona del Mar, California 92625

3 Event
4 Last Day to file Motions
5 Regarding the Sufficiency
of Fact Discovery
6 Affirmative Expert
7 Disclosures on Liability
ADR Completion
8 Rebuttal Expert
9 Disclosures on Liability
Liability Expert
10 Discovery Closed
11 Plaintiff’s Opposition to
Defendants’ Motion for
12
Summary Judgment
13 Defendant’s Reply in
Further Support of
14
Motion for Summary
15 Judgment
16 Hearing on Motion for
Summary Judgment
17 Last Day to Depose
18 UMG/Interscope Rule
30(b)(6) witness on the
19 issue of damages only.
20 Plaintiff’s Affirmative
Expert Report(s) on
21 Damages
22 Defendants’ Rebuttal
Expert Report(s) on
23 Damages (including
24 reports on costs, net
profits attributable to
25 alleged infringement and
26 apportionment of such
profits)
27
Close of Expert Damages
28 Discovery

Current Date

Proposed Date

November 23, 2011

December 5, 2011

November 23, 2011

November 30, 2011

November 28, 2011
December 16, 2011

[No Change]
December 23, 2011

January 16, 2011

January 5, 2012

Nov 28, 2011

January 11, 2012

December 5, 2011

February 1, 2012

December 19, 2011

February 20, 2012

November 14, 2011

February 1, 2012

November 23, 2011

February 27, 2012

December 16, 2011

March 12, 2012

January 6, 2012

March 19, 2012

6
C:\Users\cholley\Desktop\Pringle Stipulation re_ Extending all dates_2011.11.21.DOC

1 Motions in Limine
Oppositions to Motions in
2
Limine
3 Replies on Motions in
4 Limine
Pre Trial Order
5 Proposed Jury
6 Instructions, Voir Dire
Final pretrial conference
7 Exhibits Conference
8 Trial to Commence

January 16, 2012
January 23, 2012

April 2, 2012
April 9, 2012

January 30, 2012

April 16, 2012

February 3, 2012
February 6, 2012

April 20, 2012
April 23, 2012

February 13, 2012
February 24, 2012
February 28, 2012

April 30, 2012
May 11, 2012
May 15, 2012

9
10

Dated: November 21, 2011

LLP

HAMPTONHOLLEY

2101 East Coast Highway, Suite 260
Corona del Mar, California 92625

11
12

Dean A. Dickie
Kathleen E. Koppenhoefer
MILLER, CANFIELD, PADDOCK AND STONE,
P.L.C.
George L. Hampton IV (State Bar No. 144433)
Colin C. Holley (State Bar No. 191999)
HAMPTONHOLLEY LLP

13
14
15

By: /s/ Dean Dickie
Attorneys for Plaintiff BRYAN PRINGLE

16
17
18 Dated: November 21, 2011
19

Linda M. Burrow
Alison Mackenzie
CALDWELL LESLIE & PROCTOR, PC

20
By: /s/ Linda Burrow
Attorneys for Defendants UMG RECORDINGS,
INC., and INTERSCOPE RECORDS

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Dated: November 21, 2011

Donald Miller
Barry Slotnick
Tal Dickstein
LOEB & LOEB LLP
By: /s/ Donald Miller
Attorneys for Defendants DAVID GUETTA,
FREDERIC RIESTERER and
SHAPIRO,BERNSTEIN AND CO., INC.
7

C:\Users\cholley\Desktop\Pringle Stipulation re_ Extending all dates_2011.11.21.DOC

1
2

5

Kara E. F. Cenar
Jonathan Pink
Justin Righettini
Mariangela Seale
BRYAN CAVE LLP

6

By:

3

Dated: November 21, 2011

4

7

Attorneys for Defendants WILLIAM ADAMS;
ALLAN PINEDA; JAIME GOMEZ, and STACY
FERGUSON p/k/a FERGIE all individually and
collectively as the music group THE BLACK
EYED PEAS; will.i.am music, llc; TAB
MAGNETIC PUBLISHING; HEADPHONE
JUNKIE PUBLISHING, LLC, CHERRY RIVER
MUSIC CO.; JEEPNEY MUSIC, INC., EMI
APRIL MUSIC

8
9
10

HAMPTONHOLLEY

LLP

11
2101 East Coast Highway, Suite 260
Corona del Mar, California 92625

/s/ Kara Cenar

12
13
14
15
16

19,592,158.2\146614-00001
11/21/11 8:35 AM

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
8
C:\Users\cholley\Desktop\Pringle Stipulation re_ Extending all dates_2011.11.21.DOC

1
2
3
4
5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
On November 21, 2011, I electronically filed the foregoing STIPULATION
REQUESTING COURT TO CONTINUE TRIAL AND CASE MANAGEMENT
DATES using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the
following registered CM/ECF Users:

Barry I. Slotnick
[e-mail]
6 Donald A. Miller
[e-mail], [e-mail]
[e-mail]
7 Ira P. Gould
Tal Efriam Dickstein
[e-mail]
8
Linda M. Burrow
[e-mail], [e-mail],
[e-mail], [e-mail]
9
Ryan Christopher Williams [e-mail]
10
Kara E. F. Cenar
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
11 Ryan L. Greely
Robert C. Levels
[e-mail]
12
Kathleen E. Koppenhoefer [e-mail]
13 Rachel Aleeza Rappaport [e-mail]
Jonathan S. Pink [e-mail], [e-mail]
14
Dean A. Dickie
[e-mail], [e-mail],
15
[e-mail], [e-mail],
[e-mail], [e-mail]
16
Edwin F. McPherson
[e-mail],
17
[e-mail]
Joseph G. Vernon
[e-mail]
18
Justin Michael Righettini [e-mail]
19 Tracy B. Rane
[e-mail]
20
21
22
23
24

I am unaware of any attorneys of record in this action who are not registered
for the CM/ECF system or who did not consent to electronic service.
I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of
America that the foregoing statements are true and correct.
Dated: November 21, 2011

/s/Colin C. Holley

25
26
27
28

George L. Hampton IV (State Bar No. 144433)
Colin C. Holley (State Bar No. 191999)
HAMPTONHOLLEY LLP
2101 East Coast Highway, Suite 260
Corona del Mar, California 92625
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 949.718.4580