Zynga Game Network, Inc. v. McEachern

Filing 56

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Order to Show Cause Hearing set for 5/29/2009 10:00 AM. Signed by Judge Samuel Conti on 5/5/2009. (sclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/5/2009)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 For the Northern District of California UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ZYNGA GAME NETWORK, INC., a Delaware Corporation, ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) KYLE MCEACHERN, an individual, and ) DOES 1 through X, ) ) ) Defendants. ___________________________________) Case No. 09-1557 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY KYLE MCEACHERN SHOULD NOT BE HELD IN CONTEMPT United States District Court 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 On April 24, 2009, the Court granted a preliminary injunction against Kyle McEachern ("McEachern"). Injunction Order"). Docket No. 20 ("Preliminary On May 1, 2009, Zynga Game Network, Inc. ("Zynga") filed a Motion Requesting Order to Show Cause Why Kyle McEachern Should Not Be Held in Contempt. ("Motion"). Title 18 U.S.C. 401 states, "[a] court of the United States shall have power to punish by fine or imprisonment, or both, at its discretion, such contempt of its authority . . . as . . . [d]isobedience or resistance to its lawful writ, process, order, rule, decree, or command." 18 U.S.C. 401. Failure to obey the Docket No. 42 terms of a preliminary injunction constitutes a contempt of court. Int'l Union v. Bagwell, 512 U.S. 821, 828 (1994); Chiquita Fresh, N.A., L.L.C. v. Pandol Assocs. Mktg., Inc., No. 07-1305, 2008 WL 324009, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 5, 2008). 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 For the Northern District of California A plaintiff seeking a defendant's compliance with the provisions of an injunctive order may seek a further order requiring the defendant to show cause why the defendant should not be held in contempt and sanctioned for noncompliance. In re Grand To obtain Jury Proceedings, 142 F.3d 1416, 1424 (11th Cir. 1998). the further order, the plaintiff must: (1) cite provisions of the injunction to be enforced, (2) allege that the defendant has not complied with such provisions, and (3) ask the court, on the basis of plaintiff's representation, to order the defendant to show cause why the defendant should not be adjudged in contempt and sanctioned. Id.; Chiquita Fresh, 2008 WL 324009 at *1. United States District Court 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Zynga alleges that Mr. McEachern is not in compliance with the Preliminary Injunction Order because (1) he has failed to provide Zynga's counsel with copies of the complete source code of Mob Underworld; (2) he has failed to disclose to Zynga any passwords or keys that he knows could be used to access any Zynga network or server; (3) he has failed to provide full access to all computers, servers, and storage media in his possession, custody or control so that mirror images of the hard drives can be created. See Mot. at 7-9. Under these circumstances, an order to show cause why Mr. McEachern should not be held in contempt of the Preliminary Injunction Order is proper. For the reasons discussed above, the Court ORDERS: 1. The motion for an order to show cause why Mr. McEachern should not be held in contempt of this Court's Preliminary Injunction Order is GRANTED; 2. Mr. McEachern must show cause in writing no later than 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 For the Northern District of California Monday, May 18, 2009, why an order of civil contempt should not be issued against him; 3. Zynga must file and serve a response no later than Friday, May 22, 2009; 4. The Court will hold a show cause hearing on Friday, May 29, 2009, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 1, on the 17th floor, U.S. Courthouse, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94102. IT IS SO ORDERED. United States District Court 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Dated: May 5, 2009 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 3

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?