Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC v. Hotz et al
DECLARATION of Ryan Bricker in Sopport of 103 Opposition/Response to Motion filed bySony Computer Entertainment America LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A to Bricker Decl., # 2 Exhibit B to Bricker Decl, # 3 Exhibit C to Bricker Decl, # 4 Exhibit D to Bricker Decl, # 5 Exhibit E to Bricker Decl, # 6 Exhibit F to Bricker Decl, # 7 Exhibit G to Bricker Decl, # 8 Exhibit H to Bricker Decl, # 9 Exhibit I to Bricker Decl, # 10 Exhibit J to Bricker Decl, # 11 Exhibit K to Bricker Decl, # 12 Exhibit L to Bricker Decl, # 13 Exhibit M to Bricker Decl, # 14 Exhibit N to Bricker Decl, # 15 Exhibit O to Bricker Decl, # 16 Exhibit P to Bricker Decl, # 17 Exhibit Q to Bricker Decl, # 18 Exhibit R to Bricker Decl, # 19 Exhibit S to Bricker Decl, # 20 Exhibit T to Bricker Decl, # 21 Exhibit U to Bricker Decl)(Related document(s) 103 ) (Smith, Mehrnaz) (Filed on 3/18/2011) Modified on 3/21/2011 (ys, COURT STAFF).
Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC v. Hotz et al
Doc. 104 Att. 4
DECLARATION OF RYAN BRICKER IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT AMERICA LLC'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT GEORGE HOTZ'S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND IMPROPER VENUE
DECLARATION OF RYAN BRICKER IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF, SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT AMERICA LLC'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT GEORGE HOTZ'S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND IMPROPER VENUE
". ~ KILPATRICK .., TOWNSEND
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP
Holly Gaudreau 4152734324 hgaudreau~ki1patrcktownsend.com
VIA EMAIL at stewart(‚)etrny.com and
Stewart Kellar, Esq.
E-attomey at LawTM
Jack C. Praetzellis, Esq.
855 Front St.
San Francisco, CA 9411 1
148 Townsend St., Ste. 2 San Francisco, CA 94107
Re: Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC v. Hotz, et al. Case No. C-L 1-00167 SI (N.D. Cal)
Weare writing to propose that the parties agree to a two-week extension for the hearing on the motion to dismiss currently scheduled for April 8, 2011, and request that the Court reschedule the hearing for April 22, 2011. The Initial Case Management Conference is also the scheduled on that date. We believe that such an extension is waranted because much of jurisdictional discovery wil not be produced until after the current deadline for SCEA's the PS3 opposition, March 18, 2011. We are also writing to follow-up on SCEA's inspection of consoles.
As you know, there are a number of outstanding jurisdictional discovery issues that need to be resolved:
Documents responsive to the PayPal subpoena: The language of
the proposed order
regarding the PayPal subpoena is currently before Judge Spero. After the Court rules and the subpoena is issued, PayPal will need sufficient time to produce responsive documents. This wil not happen before SCEA's opposition is due.
Other third party jurisdictional discovery: We are still awaiting responsive documents
from Google, Y ouTube, SoftLayer and Twitter and do not expect to receive them prior to
SCEA's opposition. For example, Google has informed us that they do not intend to produce documents until 20 days after the subpoena has been served. Therefore, we do not expect to receive documents from them until March 28,2011, at the earliest.
YORK OAKLAND PALO ALTO RALEIGH SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO SEATTLE STOCKHOLM TAIPEI TOKYO WALNUT CREEK WASHINGTON, DC WINSTON-SALEM ATLANTA AUGUSTA CHARLOTTE DENVER CUBAI NEW
March 15, 2011
the Court's order Jurisdictional discovery on the impounded devices: The language of relating to the jurisdictional discovery Magistrate Judge Spero ordered is currently before Judge Spero. After the Court rules, TIG wil need suffcient time to conduct searches for responsive materials based on the agreed upon protocols. Responsive materials, therefore, wil not be produced prior to SCEA's opposition.
Mr. Hotz's insuffcient discovery responses and lack of received a response to our letter of verification:
We still have not
March 9,2011 outlining the many deficiencies in Mr. Hotz's
discovery responses, including his inadequate document production. Moreover, Mr. Hotz has failed to verify his interrogatory responses, which are thus incomplete.
Mr. Hotz's deposition: Although the Court has already ruled that Mr. Hotz's deposition should be taken, in yesterday's joint letter Mr. Hotz has asked the Court to revisit this issue yet again. After the Court rules, the parties will need to agree on a date for the deposition. It is our understanding that it may take some time to schedule the deposition and give Mr. Hotz sufficient
notice for travel to California.
Discovery served on SCEA: On March 7,2011, Mr. Hotz served Requests for Production and Interrogatories on SCEA and demanded an expedited response within two weeks Mr. Hotz wanted the discovery from SCEA so quickly, he should have (i.e., March 21,2011). If served his requests earlier. Indeed, SCEA served its original jurisdictional discovery on
February 4, 201 1. As it stands, much of the requested discovery is overbroad and beyond the
scope of jurisdictional discovery. SCEA will need more time to respond to this discovery and possibly time to meet and confer.
Inspection ofMr. Hotz's PS3 consoles: We wrote to you on February 26,2011 to schedule this inspection, but you did not respond. Mr. Hotz then served his objections to the inspection on March 7, 2011. This is now our second attempt to schedule the inspection. SCEA is amenable to conducting the inspection in New Jersey at an agreed upon location. With regard the inspection, SCEA, through its technical experts, intends to: to the scope of
(1) Conduct a visual examination of each of the PS3 consoles identified by Mr. Hotz, including both the internal and external views of each console as well as a snapshot of the XMB for each console.
taking photographs of (2) Conduct a visual examination of provided with each of
the packaging for and manuals and other documentation the PS3 consoles identified by Mr. Hotz, including taking photographs of
(3) Make two forensic images of each PS3 console identified by Mr. Hotz. One image wil be be used sent to TIG for maintenance as a pristine copy of each PS3 console and the second will by SCEA for its analysis.
(4) Connect to the PlayStation Network (by creating a new user account) using each PS3 console identified by Mr. Hotz. Please provide dates for the inspection, as well as a proposed location.
Given the above items, it is clear that SCEA will not have obtained all of
jurisdictional discovery sought by it before March is, 2011, and not for lack of effort. Please let us know by the close of business today whether or not you are amenable to fiing a stipulation with the Court to request the two-week extension for the briefing and hearing date as set forth below.
SCEA's Opposition - April 1,2011 Hotz's Reply - AprilS, 2011 Hearng - April 22, 201 1
Very truly yours,
Page 1 of 1
Lott, Shelley G.
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Lott, Shelley G. Tuesday, March 15, 2011 11:00 AM 'email@example.com'; 'firstname.lastname@example.org' Gaudreau, Holly Sony v. Hotz (Case No. C-11-00167 SI) -- 2011-03-15 Letter to Stewart Kellar and Jack Praetzellis
Attachments: 2011-03-15 Letter to S Kellar and J Praetzellis.pdf Please see attached letter of today's date. Thank you.
Shelley Lott Legal Secretary Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP Eighth Floor | Two Embarcadero Center | San Francisco, CA 94111 office 415 273 7516 | fax 415 576 0300 email@example.com | www.kilpatricktownsend.com
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?