Pecover et al v. Electronic Arts Inc.

Filing 30

STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING EXPERT DISCOVERY re 29 filed by Jeffrey Lawrence, Geoffrey Pecover. Signed by Chief Judge Vaughn R Walker on 12/12/2008. (cgk, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/12/2008)

Download PDF
Case 3:08-cv-02820-VRW Document 29 Filed 12/10/2008 Page 1 of 6 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 Shana E. Scarlett (217895) HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP 715 Hearst Avenue, Suite 202 Berkeley, CA 94710 Telephone: (510) 725-3000 Facsimile: (510) 725-3001 shanas@hbsslaw.com Stuart M. Paynter (226147) THE PAYNTER LAW FIRM PLLC 1200 G Street N.W., Suite 800 Washington, DC 20005 Telephone: (202) 626-4486 Facsimile: (866) 734-0622 stuart@smplegal.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs [Additional counsel listed on signature page] UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION GEOFFREY PECOVER and JEFFREY LAWRENCE, on behalf of themselves and a class of persons similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. ELECTRONIC ARTS, INC., a Delaware Corporation, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 08-cv-02820 VRW STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING EXPERT DISCOVERY ACTION FILED: June 5, 2008 010017-11 273397 V1 Case 3:08-cv-02820-VRW Document 29 Filed 12/10/2008 Page 2 of 6 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 COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE AS FOLLOWS: 1. In order to avoid consuming the parties' and the Court's time and resources on potential discovery issues relating to experts, the parties have agreed to certain limitations on the scope of expert-related discovery and testimony in this matter. Neither the terms of this Stipulation nor the parties' agreement to them implies that any of the information restricted from discovery in this Stipulation would otherwise be discoverable. 2. The following categories of data, information, or documents need not be disclosed by any party, and are outside the scope of permissible discovery (including deposition questions): a. Any notes or other writings taken or prepared by or for an expert witness in connection with this matter including, but not limited to, correspondence or memos to or from, and notes of conversations with, the expert's assistants and/or clerical or support staff, other expert witnesses or non-testifying expert consultants, or attorneys for the party offering the testimony of such expert witness, unless the expert witness is relying upon those notes or other writings in connection with the expert witness' opinions in this matter; b. Draft reports, draft studies, or draft work papers; preliminary or intermediate calculations, computations, or data runs; or other preliminary, intermediate or draft materials prepared by, for or at the direction of an expert witness, but any documents, data or computer programs, relied on or used to generate final results relied on by the expert shall be subject to discovery and shall be produced; and c. Any oral or written communication between an expert witness and the expert's assistants and/or clerical or support staff, other expert witnesses or non-testifying expert consultants, or attorneys for the party offering the testimony of such expert witness, unless the expert witness is relying upon the communication in connection with the expert witness' opinions in this matter. d. In addition to the limitations on discovery set forth in paragraph 2 above, the parties agree that other data or information that may have been considered by an expert but was not relied on by the expert in forming her or his opinions need not be disclosed or produced. Nothing in paragraphs 2 or 3 however, shall be construed to prevent substantive deposition questions with STIP. AND [PROPOSED] PROT. ORDER RE PRODUCTION -1OF EXPERT INFORMATION 08-cv-02820 VRW 010017-11 273397 V1 Case 3:08-cv-02820-VRW Document 29 Filed 12/10/2008 Page 3 of 6 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 respect to any data or other non-privileged information that may be relevant to the substance of the expert's opinions (including alternative theories, methodologies, variables or assumptions that the expert may have considered in formulating her or his opinions or in preparing her or his report). 3. To the extent that the specific stipulations agreed to herein waive disclosure requirements under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2)(B) or (C), the Parties agree to such waiver. IT IS SO STIPULATED. DATED: December 10, 2008 HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP By /s/ Shana E. Scarlett SHANA E. SCARLETT 715 Hearst Avenue, Suite 202 Berkeley, CA 94710 Telephone: (510) 725-3000 Facsimile: (510) 725-3001 shanas@hbsslaw.com Stuart M. Paynter (226147) THE PAYNTER LAW FIRM PLLC 1200 G Street N.W., Suite 800 Washington, DC 20005 Telephone: (202) 626-4486 Facsimile: (866) 734-0622 stuart@smplegal.com Steve W. Berman (Pro Hac Vice) HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP 1301 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 623-7292 Facsimile: (206) 623-0594 steve@hbsslaw.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs DATED: December 10, 2008 LATHAM & WATKINS LLP By /s/ Timothy L. O'Mara TIMOTHY L. O'MARA STIP. AND [PROPOSED] PROT. ORDER RE PRODUCTION OF EXPERT INFORMATION 08-cv-02820 VRW 010017-11 273397 V1 Daniel M. Wall (102580) 505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94111-6538 Telephone: (415) 391-0600 Facsimile: (415) 395-8095 -2- Case 3:08-cv-02820-VRW Document 29 Filed 12/10/2008 Page 4 of 6 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 STIP. AND [PROPOSED] PROT. ORDER RE PRODUCTION OF EXPERT INFORMATION 08-cv-02820 VRW 010017-11 273397 V1 dan.wall@lw.com tim.omara@lw.com Attorneys for Defendant I, Shana E. Scarlett, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING EXPERT DISCOVERY. In compliance with General Order 45, X.B., I hereby attest that Timothy L. O'Mara has concurred in this filing. * IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: 12/12/2008 * * ER N F D IS T IC T O R -3- A C LI alker ghn R W au Judge V FO R NIA ERED O ORDWALKER HONORABLE VAUGHN R. IT IS S NO UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE UNIT ED S S DISTRICT TE C TA RT U O RT H Case 3:08-cv-02820-VRW Document 29 Filed 12/10/2008 Page 5 of 6 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 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on December 10, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the email addresses registered, as denoted on the attached Electronic Mail Notice List, and I hereby certify that I have mailed the foregoing document or paper via the United States Postal Service to the non-CM/ECF participants indicated on the attached Manual Notice List. /s/ Shana E. Scarlett SHANA E. SCARLETT STIP. AND [PROPOSED] PROT. ORDER RE PRODUCTION OF EXPERT INFORMATION 08-cv-02820 VRW 010017-11 273397 V1 -4- CAND-ECF https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/MailList.pl?832169522855937-L_4... Case 3:08-cv-02820-VRW Document 29 Filed 12/10/2008 Page 6 of 6 Mailing Information for a Case 3:08-cv-02820-VRW Electronic Mail Notice List The following are those who are currently on the list to receive e-mail notices for this case. Steve W. Berman steve@hbsslaw.com,robert@hbsslaw.com,heatherw@hbsslaw.com Timothy L. O'Mara linda.tam@lw.com,#sfdocket@lw.com,tim.omara@lw.com Stuart McKinley Paynter stuart@smplegal.com Shana E. Scarlett shanas@hbsslaw.com,nancyq@hbsslaw.com,sf_filings@hbsslaw.com Daniel Murray Wall dan.wall@lw.com,#sfdocket@lw.com Manual Notice List The following is the list of attorneys who are not on the list to receive e-mail notices for this case (who therefore require manual noticing). You may wish to use your mouse to select and copy this list into your word processing program in order to create notices or labels for these recipients. (No manual recipients) 1 of 1 12/10/2008 2:45 PM

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?