Cats and Dogs Animal Hospital, Inc. v. Yelp! Inc.

Filing 66

Emergency MOTION to Shorten Time Relating to Motion to Compel 30(b)(6) Deposition on Monday, June 21, 2010, and Motion for Sanctions filed by Cats and Dogs Animal Hospital, Inc.. Motion Hearing set for 6/18/2010 09:00 AM. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Jared H. Beck in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel 30(b)(6) Deposition, For Sanctions, and to Shorten Time, # 2 Declaration of Jack Fitzgerald in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel 30(b)(6) Deposition, For Sanctions, and to Shorten Time, # 3 Proposed Order Granting Motion to Shorten Time)(Fitzgerald, John) (Filed on 6/16/2010)

1 THE WESTON FIRM GREGORY S. WESTON (239944) 2 888 Turquoise Street San Diego, CA 92109 3 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] 5 JACK FITZGERALD (257370) 6 2811 Sykes Court Santa Clara, CA 95051 7 Telephone: [phone] [e-mail] 9 BECK & LEE BUSINESS TRIAL LAWYERS JARED H. BECK (233743) 10 ELIZABETH LEE BECK (233742) Courthouse Plaza Building 11 28 West Flagler Street, Suite 555 12 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] 14 [e-mail] 15 16 17 Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Classes UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case No. 3:10-cv-02351 MHP Pleading Type: Class Action Action Filed: February 23, 2010 DECLARATION OF JARED H. BECK IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME, COMPEL 30(B)(6) DEPOSITION, AND FOR SANCTIONS Judge: The Hon. Marilyn Hall Patel Date: TBD Time: TBD

18 CATS AND DOGS ANIMAL HOSPITAL, INC.; ASTRO APPLIANCE SERVICE; 19 BLEEDING HEART, LLC; CALIFORNIA FURNISHINGS, INC.; CELIBRÉ, INC.; J.L. 20 FERRI ENTERTAINMENT, INC.; LE 21 PETITE RETREAT DAY SPA, LLC; SAN FRANCISCO BAY BOAT CRUISES, LLC; 22 WAG MY TAIL, INC.; and ZODIAC RESTAURANT GROUP, INC., on behalf of 23 themselves and all others similarly situated, 24 25 26 27 v. YELP! INC., Defendant. Plaintiffs,

Cats and Dogs Animal Hospital, Inc.et al. v. Yelp! Inc., Case No. 3:10-cv-02351 MHP DECLARATION OF JARED H. BECK IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME, COMPEL 30(B)(6) DEPOSITION, AND FOR SANCTIONS

1 I, Jared Beck, declare: 2 1. I am a member in good standing of the State Bars of California and Florida, and

3 admitted to practice before this Court. I have personal knowledge of the facts stated herein, and, 4 if called on to do so, could and would testify competently thereto. I make this declaration in 5 support of Plaintiffs' Motion to Shorten Time, Compel 30(b)(6) Deposition, and for Sanctions. 6 2. On May 5, 2010, Plaintiffs served upon Yelp a Notice of Deposition pursuant to

7 Rule 30(b)(6). A true and correct copy of that Notice is annexed hereto as Exhibit A. 8 3. On June 13, 2010, my partner, Elizabeth Lee Beck and I, purchased non-

9 refundable airfare to San Francisco in order to attend the deposition as scheduled. Our receipts in 10 the total amount of $954.80 are attached hereto as Exhibit B and Exhibit C. 11 4. At 9:57 p.m. on June 15, 2010, I received an email from Benjamin Kleine,

12 counsel for Yelp, attaching a document titled "Defendant Yelp! Inc.'s Objections to Plaintiffs' 13 Notice of Taking Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(B)(6) Deposition." 14 5. A true and correct copy of the June 15, 2010 email from Benjamin Kleine is

15 attached hereto as Exhibit D. 16 6. A true and correct copy of "Defendant Yelp! Inc.'s Objections to Plaintiffs'

17 Notice of Taking Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(B)(6) Deposition" is attached hereto as Exhibit E. 18 7. At 1:19 a.m. on June 16, 2010, I emailed Matthew Brown, counsel for Yelp,

19 clarifying that Yelp was cancelling the deposition. I offered to work around any issues relating to 20 the the time and place for the deposition, in the hopes of ensuring it proceed as scheduled on 21 Monday, June 21. A true and correct copy of my email is attached hereto as Exhibit F. 22 8. At 7:27 p.m. on June 16, 2010--well after the end of the business day--Yelp

23 responded by counsel restating its position raised in its objections. A true and correct copy of the 24 June 16, 2010 email from Matthew Brown is attached hereto as Exhibit G. 25 9. Plaintiffs incurred attorney's fees in the amount of $4,165 in bringing this Motion.

26 This included 12.9 hours of attorney time spent in attempting to meet and confer with Yelp, and 27 in preparing the Motion, at a rate of $350/hr. 1 Cats and Dogs Animal Hospital, Inc. et al. v. Yelp! Inc., Case No. 3:10-cv-02351 MHP DECLARATION OF JARED H. BECK IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME, COMPEL 30(B)(6) DEPOSITION, AND FOR SANCTIONS

1

10.

Plaintiffs request that this motion be heard on a shortened schedule so that the

2 Court may, no later than Friday, June 18, have the opportunity to rule and compel the deposition 3 to take place as scheduled, in order that Plaintiffs may avoid the expense and inconvenience of 4 Yelp's last-minute cancellation. In particular, Plaintiffs request that Yelp's Opposition, if any, be 5 due June 17, 2010, and request that the Court rule on the Motion thereafter, without Reply. 6 7 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is

8 true and correct. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 2 Cats and Dogs Animal Hospital, Inc. et al. v. Yelp! Inc., Case No. 3:10-cv-02351 MHP DECLARATION OF JARED H. BECK IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME, COMPEL 30(B)(6) DEPOSITION, AND FOR SANCTIONS Executed on June 16, 2010 in Miami, Florida. s/ Jared H. Beck Jared H. Beck

1 Respectfully Submitted, 2 3 4 /s/ Jack Fitzgerald Jack Fitzgerald

THE WESTON FIRM 5 GREGORY S. WESTON 888 Turquoise Street 6 San Diego, CA 92109 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] 8 [e-mail] 9 JACK FITZGERALD 2811 Sykes Court 10 Santa Clara, CA 95051 Telephone: [phone] [e-mail] 12 BECK & LEE BUSINESS TRIAL LAWYERS 13 JARED H. BECK ELIZABETH LEE BECK 14 Courthouse Plaza Building 28 West Flagler Street, Suite 555 15 Miami, FL 33130 16 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] 17 [e-mail] [e-mail] 18 Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Classes 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3 Cats and Dogs Animal Hospital, Inc. et al. v. Yelp! Inc., Case No. 3:10-cv-02351 MHP DECLARATION OF JARED H. BECK IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME, COMPEL 30(B)(6) DEPOSITION, AND FOR SANCTIONS

Exhibit A

I

2
J

4 5 o l 8 9 10 l1 t2
IJ

THE WESTON F'IRM GREGORYS. WESTON(239944) JACK FTTZGERALD (2s7370) 888Turquoise Street San Diego, CA92109 Teiephone(858) 488-1 : 672 (480\247-4553 Facsimile: [e-mail] [e-mail] BECK & LEE BUSINESSTRIAL LAWYERS JAREDH. BECK (233743) ELTZABETH LEE BECK (2337 42) 2 8 WestFlagler Street, Suite555 M i a m i ,FL 33130 Telephon:e(305)789-007 2 Facsimile(786) 664-3334 : [e-mail] elizab eth@b ckandl com e ee. Counsefor Plaintiffsandthe Proposed l Classes UNITED STATESDISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA No C a s e : 2:70-cv-073 4}-VBF-SS Pleading Type:Class Action P L A I N T I F F S ' N O T I C E OF' TAKTNG RULE 30(BX6) DEPOSITION OF DEF'ENDANT Judge: TheHon. ValerieBaker Fairbank
YELP! Defendant.

14 15 16 17

CATS AND DOGS ANIMAL 1 8 H O S P I T A L , INC., et a1., behalfof on themselves and all otherssimilarly 19 situated,

20 21 22
L3 .A

Plaintiffs,

25 26 27 28

C a t s and Dogs Animal Hospital, Inc. et al. v Yelp! Inc., CaseNo. 2:10-cv-7340VBF SS P I - e m r m r s ' NorrcE oF TAKTNc RULE 30(BX6)DEposrrroN DEFENDANT oF

1
I 3

Pursuanto the Federal t Rule of Civil Procedure 30(bX6),Plaintiffswill take beforea notarypublic or officer duly authorized administer to oathsin the State of Califomia,the deposition Defendant of Yelp!, Inc. ("Yelp") by the person(s) with 1. Issues relatedto classcertification, includingall elements underFed. Thenumberandlocationof businesses listedon Yelp.com; Yelp's practices policiesregarding solicitation Sponsors and the of or Yelp's practices and policiesregardingcontacting businesses sell to Yelp's practices and policies regarding contacting businesses The divisionbetween sales content and management Yelp; at Any manipulation removalof contenton Yelp.comin exchange or for

4 mostknowledge regarding: 5

6 R . C i v .P . 2 3 ; 7 8 2. 3.

9 advertiseron its website; s 10 4.

l l advertising subscriptions; I2
IJ

5.

conceming hostingYelp "Sponsored Events"; 6. 7.

t4 15

1 6 payment; 17 18 l9 8. 9. 10. The Yelp algorithm reviewfilter; or Yelp'sTerms Service Review of and Guidelines; practices Yelp's processes, and procedures concerning review of the

2 0 user-generatereviews claimed to have violated Yelp's Terms of Service or d 2 l ReviewGuidelines; 22
L)

il.

The number and location of businesses which contractor have The role of the "Yelp Elite Squad" in promoting or soliciting or The role of Yelp "Scouts" or "Ambassadors," other persons

contracted become to sponsors Yelp; with 12.

,)^

2 5 businesses become to Yelp sponsors; zo 13. to 2 7 compensated Yelp, in promoting or soliciting businesses becomeYelp by 28
VBF SS C a tsandDogsAnimalHospital, Inc. et al. v. Yelp!Inc., Case 2:10-cv-1340 No. NorrcE oFTAKTNG 30(B)(6) RULE DEposrrroN DEFENDANT oF Pr-.Arrrrnrs'

1 sponsors; 2
4 14. A11documents produced any party or non-partyrelevantto class by Yelp's financial information,including revenuefrom the sale of

3 certification issues; and
i5. 5 advertising subscriptions. 6 Plaintiffs will take the depositionof the following, at the date and time

7 indicated below or a comparabledate and time agreedto by the parties: 8 9 Name D a t e& Time
Location

h ; m e 2 l , 2 0 1 0 9:00am at representative(s) 6 5 0 Mission St.,2od Floor 1 0 Corporate andcontinuingfrom dayto o f Yelp!,Inc. S a nFrancisco, 94103 CA dayasnecessary 11 D a t e d May 5,2070 :

t2
1/) IJ

14 15 t6
tt

18 19 20 2I 22
L)

GregoryS. Weston THE WESTON FIRM GREGORYS. WESTON JACKFITZGERALD 888Turquoise Street S a nDiego,CA92l09 Telephone: [phone] F a c s i m i l e : 480247 4553 BECK & LEE BUSINESSTRIAL LAWYERS JAREDH. BECK ELIZABETH LEE BECK Courthouse PlazaBuilding 28 WestFlaglerStreet, Suite555 M i a m i ,FL 33130 Telephone:[phone] F a c s i m i l e : 7 86643334 6 Counsefor Plaintiffsandthe l P r o p o s eClasses d
z

ai

25 26 27 28

Ca tsandDogsAnimalHospital, Inc. et al. v. Yelp!Inc., Case 2:10-cv-7340 No. VBF SS Pr-arNrrnrs' NorrcE oFTAKTNG 30(BX6) RULE DEposrrroN DEFENDANT oF

Exhibit B

Virtually There - eTicket Receipt

https://jetbluereceipt.sabre.com/new/eticket.html?action=printEticket&pn...

eTicket Receipt
Prepared For
BECK/JARED H

CONFIRMATION # T ICKET ISSUE DATE T ICKET NUMBER ISSUING AIRLINE ISSUING AGENT

KOVLBR 13Jun10 2792145637697 JETBLUE AIRWAYS NIH/SSW

Itinerary Details
TRAVEL AIRLINE DATE
18Jun JET BLUE AIRWAYS B6 277

DEPARTURE
FT LAUDERDALE, FL

ARRIVAL
SAN FRANCISCO, CA

OTHER NOTES
Class ECONOMY Seat Number
21B (CONFIRMED)

Time
6:56pm

Time
10:03pm

Baggage Allowance 1PC Booking Status CONFIRMED Fare Basis VH3 Not Valid Before 18JUN Not Valid After 18JUN Class ECONOMY Seat Number
20B (CONFIRMED)

Terminal
T ERMINAL 3 21Jun - 22Jun JET BLUE AIRWAYS B6 278 SAN FRANCISCO, CA

Terminal
INT ERNAT IONAL T ERMINAL FT LAUDERDALE, FL

Time
9:55pm

Time
6:12am

Baggage Allowance 1PC Booking Status CONFIRMED Fare Basis RH7 Not Valid Before 21JUN Not Valid After 21JUN

Terminal
INT ERNAT IONAL T ERMINAL

Terminal
T ERMINAL 3

Payment/Fare Details
Form of Payment Endorsement / Restrictions Fare Calculation Line Fare

CREDIT CARD - VISA : XXXXXXXXXXXX 9459 NONREF - FEE FOR CHG/CXL FLL B6 SFO230.70VH3 B6 FLL193.49RH7 USD424.19END ZPFLLSFO XFFLL4.5SFO4.5 USD 424.19

of 2

6/16/2010 6:18 PM

Virtually There - eTicket Receipt

https://jetbluereceipt.sabre.com/new/eticket.html?action=printEticket&pn...

Taxes/Fees/Charges

USD 31.81 US (US TRANSPORTATION TAX) USD 7.40 ZP (US SEGMENT TAX) USD 14.00 XT (COMBINED TAXES)

Total Fare

USD 477.40

Positiv e identification required for airport check in Notice: Carriage and other service provided by the carrier are subject to conditions of carriage, which are hereby incorporated by reference. These conditions may be obtained from the issuing carrier. E-Ticket Receipt total includes only air fare, taxes and fees applicable to air fare, baggage fees, and EML fees as may be applicable. E-Receipt does not include other additional fees that may apply, such as but not limited to the Phone booking fee, Pet Fee, or Unaccompanied Minor Fees. Please call 1-800JetBlue to receive a receipt total that includes all fees paid.
Important Legal Notices

of 2

6/16/2010 6:18 PM

Exhibit C

Virtually There - eTicket Receipt

https://jetbluereceipt.sabre.com/new/eticket.html?action=printEticket&pn...

eTicket Receipt
Prepared For
BECK/ELIZABETH

CONFIRMATION # T ICKET ISSUE DATE T ICKET NUMBER ISSUING AIRLINE ISSUING AGENT

KOVLBR 13Jun10 2792145637696 JETBLUE AIRWAYS NIH/SSW

Itinerary Details
TRAVEL AIRLINE DATE
18Jun JET BLUE AIRWAYS B6 277

DEPARTURE
FT LAUDERDALE, FL

ARRIVAL
SAN FRANCISCO, CA

OTHER NOTES
Class ECONOMY Seat Number
21A (CONFIRMED)

Time
6:56pm

Time
10:03pm

Baggage Allowance 1PC Booking Status CONFIRMED Fare Basis VH3 Not Valid Before 18JUN Not Valid After 18JUN Class ECONOMY Seat Number
20C (CONFIRMED)

Terminal
T ERMINAL 3 21Jun - 22Jun JET BLUE AIRWAYS B6 278 SAN FRANCISCO, CA

Terminal
INT ERNAT IONAL T ERMINAL FT LAUDERDALE, FL

Time
9:55pm

Time
6:12am

Baggage Allowance 1PC Booking Status CONFIRMED Fare Basis RH7 Not Valid Before 21JUN Not Valid After 21JUN

Terminal
INT ERNAT IONAL T ERMINAL

Terminal
T ERMINAL 3

Payment/Fare Details
Form of Payment Endorsement / Restrictions Fare Calculation Line Fare

CREDIT CARD - VISA : XXXXXXXXXXXX 9459 NONREF - FEE FOR CHG/CXL FLL B6 SFO230.70VH3 B6 FLL193.49RH7 USD424.19END ZPFLLSFO XFFLL4.5SFO4.5 USD 424.19

of 2

6/16/2010 6:19 PM

Virtually There - eTicket Receipt

https://jetbluereceipt.sabre.com/new/eticket.html?action=printEticket&pn...

Taxes/Fees/Charges

USD 31.81 US (US TRANSPORTATION TAX) USD 7.40 ZP (US SEGMENT TAX) USD 14.00 XT (COMBINED TAXES)

Total Fare

USD 477.40

Positiv e identification required for airport check in Notice: Carriage and other service provided by the carrier are subject to conditions of carriage, which are hereby incorporated by reference. These conditions may be obtained from the issuing carrier. E-Ticket Receipt total includes only air fare, taxes and fees applicable to air fare, baggage fees, and EML fees as may be applicable. E-Receipt does not include other additional fees that may apply, such as but not limited to the Phone booking fee, Pet Fee, or Unaccompanied Minor Fees. Please call 1-800JetBlue to receive a receipt total that includes all fees paid.
Important Legal Notices

of 2

6/16/2010 6:19 PM

Exhibit D

Jared H. Beck
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Kleine, Benjamin [[e-mail]] Tuesday, June 15, 2010 9:57 PM [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail] Brown, Matthew D.; Boot, Sarah Cats and Dogs v. Yelp - Objections to 30(b)(6) Deposition Notice 2010-06-15 - Yelp's Objections to Plaintiffs' 30(b)(6).PDF; 2010-06-15 - Yelp's Objections to Plaintiffs' 30(b)(6) - Proof of Service.PDF

Counsel ­ Attached are Yelp's objections to plaintiffs' 30(b)(6) deposition notice and a proof of service. Hard copies follow. Regards, Ben
Benjamin H. Kleine Cooley LLP 101 California Street, 5th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94111 Direct: 415-693-2022 · Fax: [phone]

This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended recipient, please be advised that the content of this message is subject to access, review and disclosure by the sender's Email System Administrator. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachment) is not intended or written by us to be used, and cannot be used, (i) by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) for promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.

1

Exhibit E

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
COOLEY LLP
A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW S A N FR A N C I S C O

COOLEY LLP MICHAEL G. RHODES (116127) ([e-mail]) MATTHEW D. BROWN (196972) ([e-mail]) BENJAMIN H. KLEINE (257225) ([e-mail]) 101 California Street, 5th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-5800 Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone] Attorneys for Defendant YELP! INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CATS AND DOGS ANIMAL HOSPITAL, INC., et al., on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. YELP! INC., Defendant.

No. CV 10-02351 MHP DEFENDANT YELP! INC.'S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF TAKING FED. R. CIV. P. 30(B)(6) DEPOSITION

1.

DEFENDANT YELP'S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' 30(B)(6) DEPO. NOTICE CASE NO. CV 10-02351 MHP

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
COOLEY LLP
A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW S A N FR A N C I S C O

Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26 and 30, Defendant Yelp! Inc. ("Yelp") objects and responds to Plaintiffs' Notice of Taking Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition of Defendant ("Notice") as follows: I. GENERAL OBJECTIONS Yelp hereby sets forth the following General Objections which apply to the Notice and to each deposition topic: 1. Yelp objects to this Notice as premature given the procedural history and posture

of the case. This case has recently been transferred from the Central District of California to this Court, where a related case is pending. Currently pending before this Court is Yelp's motion to consolidate for all purposes this case ("Cats and Dogs") with Boris Y. Levitt v. Yelp! Inc., Case No. CV 10-01321 MHP ("Levitt") ("Yelp's Motion"), to which Plaintiff in Levitt has stipulated. If the Court grants Yelp's Motion, discovery of these two matters will be

consolidated, which means that Plaintiffs in Cats and Dogs and Plaintiff in Levitt will jointly depose Yelp once on these topics. Regardless of whether Yelp's Motion is granted, Cats and Dogs and Levitt are putative class actions that have been deemed related and are pending before the same judge. Accordingly, Yelp anticipates that deposition discovery will at least be

coordinated in the two cases to avoid undue duplication of effort, burden, and expense. Further, in addition to resolution of the consolidation issues, document discovery has just begun and the Court has not yet entered a Scheduling Order governing discovery and class certification. 2. Yelp objects to the date and time set forth unilaterally by Plaintiffs in this Notice.

Yelp will make a witness available for deposition at a mutually agreed upon date and time, consistent with any Scheduling Order entered by the Court. 3. Yelp objects to the Notice and each deposition topic to the extent that they call

for disclosure of information protected by the attorney-client privilege, work product immunity, or any other applicable privilege, immunity, or other limitation on discovery. 4. Yelp objects to the Notice and each deposition topic to the extent that they seek

the disclosure of information that Yelp, any other party to this litigation, or any non-party deems to embody material that is private, business confidential, proprietary, trade secret, or otherwise 2.
DEFENDANT YELP'S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' 30(B)(6) DEPO. NOTICE CASE NO. CV 10-02351 MHP

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
COOLEY LLP
A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW S A N FR A N C I S C O

protected from disclosure pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26, Federal Rule of Evidence 501, California Evidence Code section 1060, or California Constitution, article I, section 1. Yelp will disclose such information only upon entry of an appropriate protective order against the unauthorized use or disclosure of such information. 5. Yelp objects to the Notice and each deposition topic to the extent that they seek

information not currently in Yelp's possession, custody, or control. 6. Yelp objects to the Notice and to each deposition topic to the extent that they

seek information that is neither relevant to the subject matter of this lawsuit nor reasonably likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 7. Yelp objects to the Notice and to each deposition topic to the extent that they

seek information relevant only to the merits of the action and not to issues of class certification. As Yelp has stated in the Joint Rule 26(f) Conference Report filed by the parties in the Central District of California before transfer, Yelp believes that discovery should proceed on a bifurcated schedule. Such a bifurcated schedule would focus first on class certification issues and discovery pertaining to any named Plaintiff in this action prior to class certification briefing, and merits discovery (other than with respect to any named Plaintiff in this matter) would proceed after the class certification phase. 8. Yelp objects to the Notice and to each deposition topic, to the extent that they are

not limited by time period, as excessive, not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and would subject Yelp to unreasonable and undue annoyance, oppression, burden, and expense. 9. Yelp objects to the Notice to the extent it seeks information regarding businesses

that are not based in the United States and Yelp's policies, procedures, organization, or administration outside of the United States as overly broad and not relevant to the subject matter of this action or reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. To the extent Yelp agrees to testify on a particular topic, such agreement is limited to testimony concerning businesses based in the United States or Yelp's activities within the United States.

3.

DEFENDANT YELP'S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' 30(B)(6) DEPO. NOTICE CASE NO. CV 10-02351 MHP

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
COOLEY LLP
A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW S A N FR A N C I S C O

10.

Yelp reserves the right to supplement its objections and responses or to make

supplemental or additional objections at the deposition as additional information pertinent to the deposition topics becomes available. II. OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO DEPOSITION TOPICS Without waiving or limiting in any manner any of the foregoing General Objections, but rather, expressly incorporating them to the extent applicable into each of the following responses as though fully set forth therein, Yelp objects to the specific topics set forth in the Notice as follows: TOPIC 1: Issues related to class certification, including all elements under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23. RESPONSE TO TOPIC 1: Yelp incorporates by reference its General Objections above as though set forth in response to this topic. Yelp further objects to this topic on the grounds that it is overly broad, and unduly burdensome and oppressive. Yelp further objects to this topic because it is vague and ambiguous, as well as vague and ambiguous as to time. Yelp further objects to this topic to the extent that it calls for a legal conclusion. Yelp further objects to this topic to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving its objections, Yelp will designate a witness to testify on this topic only after this topic is sufficiently clarified and narrowed through the parties' meet and confer efforts, and after entry of an appropriate protective order. Plaintiffs must specify which "issues related to class certification" they seek to address with Yelp's 30(b)(6) deponent(s). TOPIC 2: The number and location of businesses listed on Yelp.com. RESPONSE TO TOPIC 2: Yelp incorporates by reference its General Objections above as though set forth in response to this topic. Yelp further objects to this topic on the grounds that it is overly broad and unduly burdensome. Yelp further objects to this topic because it is vague and ambiguous as 4.
DEFENDANT YELP'S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' 30(B)(6) DEPO. NOTICE CASE NO. CV 10-02351 MHP

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
COOLEY LLP
A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW S A N FR A N C I S C O

to time and as to the undefined terms "location" and "businesses." Yelp further objects to the term "businesses" as potentially overly broad or unduly burdensome because the Yelp website contains reviews for entities, locations, persons, and things that are not businesses (e.g., local parks). Yelp further objects to this topic as unduly burdensome and oppressive, as worded, because no 30(b)(6) deponent can be expected to commit to memory the locations of the thousands of businesses listed on Yelp.com, particularly since the listings on Yelp.com change over time. Yelp further objects to this topic to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving its objections, Yelp will designate a witness to testify on this topic only after this topic is sufficiently clarified and narrowed through the parties' meet and confer efforts, and after entry of an appropriate protective order. TOPIC 3: Yelp's practices and policies regarding the solicitation of Sponsors or advertisers on its website. RESPONSE TO TOPIC 3: Yelp incorporates by reference its General Objections above as though set forth in response to this topic. Yelp further objects to this topic on the grounds that it is overly broad and unduly burdensome. Yelp further objects to this topic because it is vague and ambiguous as to time and as to the undefined term "Sponsors." Yelp further objects to this topic as vague and ambiguous as to what activities constitutes "solicitation . . . on its website." Yelp further objects to this topic to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving its objections, Yelp will designate a witness to testify on this topic only after this topic is sufficiently clarified and narrowed through the parties' meet and confer efforts, and after entry of an appropriate protective order. TOPIC 4: Yelp's practices and policies regarding contacting businesses to sell advertising subscriptions. 5.
DEFENDANT YELP'S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' 30(B)(6) DEPO. NOTICE CASE NO. CV 10-02351 MHP

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
COOLEY LLP
A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW S A N FR A N C I S C O

RESPONSE TO TOPIC 4: Yelp incorporates by reference its General Objections above as though set forth in response to this topic. Yelp further objects to this topic on the grounds that it is overly broad and unduly burdensome. Yelp further objects to this topic because it is vague and ambiguous as to time and as to the undefined term "advertising subscriptions." Yelp further objects to this topic to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving its objections, Yelp will designate a witness to testify on this topic only after this topic is sufficiently clarified and narrowed through the parties' meet and confer efforts, and after entry of an appropriate protective order. TOPIC 5: Yelp's practices and policies regarding contacting businesses concerning hosting Yelp "Sponsored Events." RESPONSE TO TOPIC 5: Yelp incorporates by reference its General Objections above as though set forth in response to this topic. Yelp further objects to this topic on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, and irrelevant, and, therefore, not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Yelp further objects to this topic because it is vague and ambiguous as to time and as to the undefined terms "hosting," and "Sponsored Events." Yelp further objects to this topic to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine. TOPIC 6: The division between sales and content management at Yelp. RESPONSE TO TOPIC 6: Yelp incorporates by reference its General Objections above as though set forth in response to this topic. Yelp further objects to this topic because it is vague and ambiguous, particularly as to time and as to the undefined terms "division," "sales" and "content

6.

DEFENDANT YELP'S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' 30(B)(6) DEPO. NOTICE CASE NO. CV 10-02351 MHP

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
COOLEY LLP
A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW S A N FR A N C I S C O

management." Yelp further objects to this topic to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving its objections, Yelp will designate a witness to testify on this topic only after this topic is sufficiently clarified through the parties' meet and confer efforts, and after entry of an appropriate protective order. TOPIC 7: Any manipulation or removal of content on Yelp.com in exchange for payment. RESPONSE TO TOPIC 7: Yelp incorporates by reference its General Objections above as though set forth in response to this topic. Yelp further objects to this topic on the grounds that it is overly broad and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Yelp further objects to this topic because it is vague and ambiguous, particularly as to time and as to the undefined terms "manipulation," "removal," and "content." Yelp further objects to this topic because it lacks foundation and assumes facts not in evidence. Yelp further objects to this topic to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving its objections, Yelp will designate a witness to testify on this topic only after this topic is sufficiently clarified and narrowed through the parties' meet and confer efforts, and after entry of an appropriate protective order. TOPIC 8: The Yelp algorithm or review filter. RESPONSE TO TOPIC 8: Yelp incorporates by reference its General Objections above as though set forth in response to this topic. Yelp further objects to this topic on the grounds that it is overly broad and irrelevant, and, therefore, not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Yelp further objects to this topic because it is vague and ambiguous as to time and as to the undefined term "algorithm." Yelp further objects to this topic to the extent it seeks trade secret information critical to the continued operation of Yelp's business. Yelp further objects to 7.
DEFENDANT YELP'S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' 30(B)(6) DEPO. NOTICE CASE NO. CV 10-02351 MHP

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
COOLEY LLP
A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW S A N FR A N C I S C O

this topic to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving its objections, Yelp will designate a witness to testify as to Yelp's review filter after entry of an appropriate protective order. Due to the highly

confidential nature of this information, the parties must meet and confer prior to the deposition as to the manner in which questioning and testimony on this deposition topic will take place. TOPIC 9: Yelp's Terms of Service and Review Guidelines. RESPONSE TO TOPIC 9: Yelp incorporates by reference its General Objections above as though set forth in response to this topic. Yelp objects to this topic on the grounds that it is overly broad and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Yelp further objects to this topic because it is vague and ambiguous as to time and as to the undefined terms "Terms of Service" and "Review Guidelines." Yelp will construe the undefined terms "Terms of Service" and "Review Guidelines" to refer to those currently set forth on Yelp's Website. Yelp further objects to this topic to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving its objections, after entry of an appropriate protective order, Yelp will designate a witness to testify about Yelp's general policies and procedures concerning the review of user-generated reviews in response to claims that the reviews violate Yelp's Terms of Service or Review Guidelines. TOPIC 10: Yelp's processes, practices, and procedures concerning the review of user-generated reviews claimed to have violated Yelp's Terms of Service or Review Guidelines. RESPONSE TO TOPIC 10: Yelp incorporates by reference its General Objections above as though set forth in response to this topic. Yelp further objects to this topic on the grounds that it is overly broad and, therefore, unduly burdensome. Yelp further objects to this topic because it is vague and 8.
DEFENDANT YELP'S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' 30(B)(6) DEPO. NOTICE CASE NO. CV 10-02351 MHP

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
COOLEY LLP
A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW S A N FR A N C I S C O

ambiguous as to time and as to the undefined terms "review," "Terms of Service," and "Review Guidelines." Yelp will construe the undefined terms "Terms of Service" and "Review

Guidelines" to refer to those currently set forth on Yelp's Website. Yelp further objects to this topic because it lacks foundation and assumes facts not in evidence. Yelp further objects to this topic to the extent that it calls for a legal conclusion. Yelp further objects to this topic to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving its objections, after entry of an appropriate protective order, Yelp will designate a witness to testify about Yelp's general policies and procedures concerning the review of user-generated reviews in response to claims that the reviews violate Yelp's Terms of Service or Review Guidelines. TOPIC 11: The number and location of businesses which contract or have contracted to become sponsors with Yelp. RESPONSE TO TOPIC 11: Yelp incorporates by reference its General Objections above as though set forth in response to this topic. Yelp further objects to this topic on the grounds that it is overly broad and, therefore, unduly burdensome. Yelp further objects to this topic because it is vague and ambiguous as to time and as to the undefined terms "location" and "sponsors." Yelp further objects to this topic as unduly burdensome, as worded, because no 30(b)(6) deponent can be expected to commit to memory the locations of the thousands of businesses that have entered into advertising contracts with Yelp. Yelp further objects to this topic to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving its objections, Yelp will designate a witness to testify on this topic only after this topic is sufficiently clarified and narrowed through the parties' meet and confer efforts, and after entry of an appropriate protective order.

9.

DEFENDANT YELP'S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' 30(B)(6) DEPO. NOTICE CASE NO. CV 10-02351 MHP

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
COOLEY LLP
A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW S A N FR A N C I S C O

TOPIC 12: The role of the "Yelp Elite Squad" in promoting or soliciting businesses to become Yelp sponsors. RESPONSE TO TOPIC 12: Yelp incorporates by reference its General Objections above as though set forth in response to this topic. Yelp further objects to this topic as overly broad and, therefore, unduly burdensome. Yelp further objects to this topic because it is vague and ambiguous as to time and as to the undefined terms "Yelp Elite Squad" and "sponsors." Yelp further objects to this topic to the extent that it calls for a legal conclusion. Yelp further objects to this topic to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving its objections, Yelp will designate a witness to testify on this topic only after this topic is sufficiently clarified through the parties' meet and confer efforts, and after entry of an appropriate protective order. TOPIC 13: The role of Yelp "Scouts" or "Ambassadors" or other persons compensated by Yelp, in promoting or soliciting businesses to become Yelp Sponsors. RESPONSE TO TOPIC 13: Yelp incorporates by reference its General Objections above as though set forth in response to this topic. Yelp further objects to this topic as overly broad and, therefore, unduly burdensome. Yelp further objects to this topic because it is vague and ambiguous as to time

and as to the undefined terms "Scouts," "Ambassadors," "compensated," and "Sponsors." Yelp further objects to the term "compensated" as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and irrelevant, and, therefore, not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Yelp further objects to this topic to the extent that it calls for a legal conclusion. Yelp further objects to this topic to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine.

10.

DEFENDANT YELP'S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' 30(B)(6) DEPO. NOTICE CASE NO. CV 10-02351 MHP

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
COOLEY LLP
A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW S A N FR A N C I S C O

Subject to and without waiving its objections, Yelp will designate a witness to testify on this topic only after this topic is sufficiently clarified through the parties' meet and confer efforts, and after entry of an appropriate protective order. TOPIC 14: All documents produced by any party or non-party relevant to class certification issues. RESPONSE TO TOPIC 14: Yelp incorporates by reference its General Objections above as though set forth in response to this topic. Yelp objects to this topic as premature as the parties have not yet produced documents in this case. Yelp further objects to this topic on the grounds that it is overly broad and, therefore, unduly burdensome. Yelp further objects to this topic as unduly burdensome and oppressive, as worded, because no 30(b)(6) deponent can be expected to commit to memory detailed information about all of the documents produced in this litigation, especially those produced by a party other than Yelp. Yelp further objects to this topic because it is vague and ambiguous. Yelp further objects to this topic to the extent that it calls for a legal conclusion. Yelp further objects to this topic to the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine. TOPIC 15: Yelp's financial information, including revenue from the sale of advertising subscriptions. RESPONSE TO TOPIC 15: Yelp incorporates by reference its General Objections above as though set forth in response to this topic. Yelp further objects to this topic on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, and that it is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Yelp further objects to this topic because it is vague and ambiguous as to time and as to the undefined terms "financial information" and "advertising subscriptions." Yelp further objects to this topic to the extent that it seeks information only relevant to the merits of this action and not to issues of class certification. Yelp further objects to this topic to

11.

DEFENDANT YELP'S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' 30(B)(6) DEPO. NOTICE CASE NO. CV 10-02351 MHP

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
COOLEY LLP
A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW S A N FR A N C I S C O

the extent that it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine. Dated: June 15, 2010 COOLEY LLP

/s/ Matthew D. Brown Matthew D. Brown (196972) Attorneys for Defendant Yelp! Inc.

12.

DEFENDANT YELP'S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' 30(B)(6) DEPO. NOTICE CASE NO. CV 10-02351 MHP

Exhibit F

Jared H. Beck
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Jared H. Beck [[e-mail]] Wednesday, June 16, 2010 4:19 AM 'Kleine, Benjamin'; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail] 'Brown, Matthew D.'; 'Boot, Sarah' RE: Cats and Dogs v. Yelp - Objections to 30(b)(6) Deposition Notice

Matt: Are we to understand that these objections, which were sent to Plaintiffs' counsel on the evening of Tuesday, June 15th, reflect your intention not to produce a witness for Yelp's Rule 30(b)(6) deposition noticed for Monday, June 21st in San Francisco? If so, your eleventh hour maneuver is truly unfortunate. As you know, Yelp's deposition has been noticed since May 5th. Having heard nothing from you or your cocounsel to suggest otherwise during the intervening six weeks, we assumed that the designated date and time were convenient for your client, and we have already incurred costs in making arrangements to take the deposition in San Francisco on Monday, including purchasing nonrefundable airfare. If the starting time or place are issues for you, those can be worked around ­ obviously, making sure this deposition happens on Monday will obviate the need for us to seek reimbursement of our costs with the Court. In addition, our side has contacted you several times over the past couple weeks to meet and confer on Yelp's objections to our discovery requests, as well as other discovery issues including electronic discovery matters, and you have refused to meet and confer or even schedule a time to meet and confer. I will make the same request once again: when are you available to meet and confer on discovery? Your continual unresponsiveness on such a basic discovery obligation ­ and now, your apparent lastminute refusal to comply with a deposition notice that has been pending for six weeks ­ make it apparent that Plaintiffs' only recourse to obtain discovery in this case may be to file a motion under Rule 37, including a request for appropriate sanctions. I hope that won't be necessary. Very truly yours,

JARED H. BECK, ESQ. | Beck & Lee Business Trial Lawyers Courthouse Plaza Building | 28 West Flagler Street Suite 555 | Miami, Florida 33130 305-789-0072 Phone | 786-664-3334 Fax [e-mail] | twitter.com/JaredBeck website: www.beckandlee.com | blog: beckandlee.wordpress.com
====================================================== The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential, may be attorney privileged, and is intended only for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. ======================================================

From: Kleine, Benjamin [mailto:[e-mail]] Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 9:57 PM To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail] Cc: Brown, Matthew D.; Boot, Sarah Subject: Cats and Dogs v. Yelp - Objections to 30(b)(6) Deposition Notice

1

Counsel ­ Attached are Yelp's objections to plaintiffs' 30(b)(6) deposition notice and a proof of service. Hard copies follow. Regards, Ben
Benjamin H. Kleine Cooley LLP 101 California Street, 5th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94111 Direct: 415-693-2022 · Fax: [phone]

This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended recipient, please be advised that the content of this message is subject to access, review and disclosure by the sender's Email System Administrator. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachment) is not intended or written by us to be used, and cannot be used, (i) by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) for promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.

2

Exhibit G

Jared H. Beck
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Brown, Matthew D. [[e-mail]] Wednesday, June 16, 2010 7:27 PM Jared H. Beck Boot, Sarah; Kleine, Benjamin; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail] RE: Cats and Dogs v. Yelp - Objections to 30(b)(6) Deposition Notice

Jared, I find it hard to believe that you would have assumed one or more depositions would be proceeding on the noticed 30(b)(6) topics on Monday, June 21. I don't recall you even mentioning a June 21 deposition since the notice was served, let alone inquiring as to which of the 15 (overly broad) topics would be covered and how many witnesses there would be. Further, plaintiffs know very well Yelp's longstanding view that the Cats and Dogs and Levitt cases should be consolidated, and our related view that we should not be engaging in the same discovery twice. While we have agreed to move forward with written discovery which was initiated when the Cats and Dogs case was still in the Central District, it is premature to move forward with depositions before the issues of consolidation and coordination of discovery have been resolved. (As you know, our motion to consolidate and your crossmotion are scheduled to be heard on July 19.) Further, no protective order has been entered and, thus, as you know from our objections and responses to your other discovery, Yelp would be unable to proceed. Given this background, I also find it hard to believe that you would have purchased nonrefundable airfare in reliance on the deposition(s) proceeding on Monday. Regarding the meet and confer on Plaintiffs' RFPs, Yelp has never said or suggested that it will not meet and confer. To the contrary, we discussed this issue with Jack Fitzgerald on Friday, June 4, and we stated quite explicitly that we are prepared to meet and confer with you and Levitt's counsel on Yelp's responses. The result of those discussions was that Jack was going to contact counsel for Levitt early the following week to discuss Levitt's position on (a) whether the cases should be consolidated (Yelp's view) or (b) whether the Levitt case should be stayed (the Cats and Dogs Plaintiffs' view). We understood that, following that discussion, Jack would get back in touch with us to discuss a date for the meet and confer. Depending on Levitt's counsel's position, such meet and confer either would or would not include Levitt's counsel. We never heard back from Jack, and your current attempt to portray this as "unresponsiveness" on Yelp's part is unpersuasive. Yelp is available to meet and confer Wednesday and Thursday of next week. Please let us know if you are available on those days--and, if so, during what hours--and we will then check with Levitt's counsel on their availability. Sincerely, Matt

From: Jared H. Beck [mailto:[e-mail]] Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 1:19 AM To: Kleine, Benjamin; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail] Cc: Brown, Matthew D.; Boot, Sarah Subject: RE: Cats and Dogs v. Yelp - Objections to 30(b)(6) Deposition Notice

Matt: Are we to understand that these objections, which were sent to Plaintiffs' counsel on the evening of Tuesday, June 15th, reflect your intention not to produce a witness for Yelp's Rule 30(b)(6) deposition noticed for Monday, June 21st in San Francisco? If so, your eleventh hour maneuver is truly unfortunate. As you know, Yelp's deposition has been noticed
1

since May 5th. Having heard nothing from you or your cocounsel to suggest otherwise during the intervening six weeks, we assumed that the designated date and time were convenient for your client, and we have already incurred costs in making arrangements to take the deposition in San Francisco on Monday, including purchasing nonrefundable airfare. If the starting time or place are issues for you, those can be worked around ­ obviously, making sure this deposition happens on Monday will obviate the need for us to seek reimbursement of our costs with the Court. In addition, our side has contacted you several times over the past couple weeks to meet and confer on Yelp's objections to our discovery requests, as well as other discovery issues including electronic discovery matters, and you have refused to meet and confer or even schedule a time to meet and confer. I will make the same request once again: when are you available to meet and confer on discovery? Your continual unresponsiveness on such a basic discovery obligation ­ and now, your apparent lastminute refusal to comply with a deposition notice that has been pending for six weeks ­ make it apparent that Plaintiffs' only recourse to obtain discovery in this case may be to file a motion under Rule 37, including a request for appropriate sanctions. I hope that won't be necessary. Very truly yours,

JARED H. BECK, ESQ. | Beck & Lee Business Trial Lawyers Courthouse Plaza Building | 28 West Flagler Street Suite 555 | Miami, Florida 33130 305-789-0072 Phone | 786-664-3334 Fax [e-mail] | twitter.com/JaredBeck website: www.beckandlee.com | blog: beckandlee.wordpress.com
====================================================== The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential, may be attorney privileged, and is intended only for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. ======================================================

From: Kleine, Benjamin [mailto:[e-mail]] Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 9:57 PM To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail] Cc: Brown, Matthew D.; Boot, Sarah Subject: Cats and Dogs v. Yelp - Objections to 30(b)(6) Deposition Notice

Counsel ­ Attached are Yelp's objections to plaintiffs' 30(b)(6) deposition notice and a proof of service. Hard copies follow. Regards, Ben
Benjamin H. Kleine Cooley LLP 101 California Street, 5th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94111 Direct: 415-693-2022 · Fax: [phone]

2

This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended recipient, please be advised that the content of this message is subject to access, review and disclosure by the sender's Email System Administrator. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachment) is not intended or written by us to be used, and cannot be used, (i) by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) for promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.

This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended recipient, please be advised that the content of this message is subject to access, review and disclosure by the sender's Email System Administrator. IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachment) is not intended or written by us to be used, and cannot be used, (i) by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) for promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.

3