Integral Development Corp v. Tolat

Filing 184

ORDER REGARDING [174-3] 177 THE PARTIES' SEVENTH JOINT LETTER BRIEF DATED SEPTEMBER 30, 2013. Signed by Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler on 10/24/2013.(lblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/24/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 Northern District of California 10 San Francisco Division INTEGRAL DEVELOPMENT CORP, 12 For the Northern District of California UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 Plaintiff, v. 13 No. C 12-06575 JSW (LB) ORDER REGARDING THE PARTIES’ SEVENTH JOINT LETTER BRIEF DATED SEPTEMBER 30, 2013 VIRAL TOLAT, 14 15 16 17 18 [Re: ECF Nos. 174-3, 177] Defendant. _____________________________________/ The court held a discovery hearing on October 24, 2013 on the parties’ seventh joint discovery letter brief and issues this order to memorialize the rulings made at it 1. Review. The main dispute is whether information from the independent expert will be 19 produced directly to Integral or whether it will be produced first to Dr. Tolat’s counsel, Farella 20 Braun + Martel, to screen for Dr. Tolat’s personal information. For the reasons stated on the record, 21 the information will be produced to Farella first. Farella will review the documents and identify any 22 withheld documents on the equivalent of a privilege log according to the procedures set forth in the 23 undersigned’s standing order. Also, as the court said on the record (with Farella’s agreement), the 24 productions are not limited to “Integral confidential information,” see ECF No. 174-3 at 9,1 but 25 encompass all Integral information. 26 2. Timing. Farella represented that it will produce the remaining documents by early next week 27 28 1 Citations are to the electronic case file (ECF) with pin cites to the electronically-generated page numbers at the top of the page (as opposed to the parties’ numbering on the bottom). ORDER (C 12-06575 JSW (LB)) 1 at the latest. Thus, the court’s order is that the documents must be produced by Wednesday, October 2 30, 2013. 3 3. Remaining Media. The discovery dispute also centered on whether Dr. Tolat had other media 4 devices and whether Integral could have access to certain computers and other media devices that at 5 some point were synced to the Dropbox account. See ECF No. 74-3 at 11. As to the other media 6 devices, Farella represented that Dr. Tolat has turned over all media devices for forensic evaluation, 7 and he will provide a declaration to that effect. As to other computers, the independent expert 8 provided serial numbers in response to Integral’s request for “unique identifiers,” but Integral now 9 wants registry numbers as well. Farella said that it would ask the expert whether this additional 10 information is available, and if it is, it will produce it. 4. General Questions About Functionality. Another issue was Integral’s questions to the expert 12 For the Northern District of California UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 about functionality. See ECF No. 174-3 at 5-9. Farella will provide the questions to the expert and 13 ask how much it will cost to answer them. It is under no obligation to pay for the answers, but 14 depending on the cost, it may or may not decide to pay, and Integral may elect to pay the expert for 15 an answer that will be shared with both sides. There can be no unilateral questions by Integral: 16 whatever it asks about has to be sent to Farella. But this process will allow answers that may 17 illuminate the forensic landscape in preparation for the settlement conference. Farella agreed to this 18 process. 19 5. Dr. Tolat’s Access to the Trade Secrets. The court ordered access that includes providing the 20 source code to Farella pursuant to the protective order. Dr. Tolat may have visual access to it only 21 in the presence of his attorneys. As to the other written disclosures (the list of the alleged trade 22 secrets and the interrogatory responses), Farella may give these to Dr. Tolat pursuant to the 23 protective order, but Dr. Tolat cannot take them to work at EBS or otherwise give EBS (or anyone 24 else) access to them. Dr. Tolat’s expert also may have access to this discovery pursuant to the 25 protective order. If this order does not provide sufficient detail, the parties may submit a stipulated 26 order with these agreed-to protections spelled out in the detail that they deem appropriate. 27 6. Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition. This should go forward. 28 This disposes of ECF No. 177 (incorporating by reference ECF No. 174-3). ORDER (C 12-06575 JSW (LB)) 2 1 2 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 24, 2013 _______________________________ LAUREL BEELER United States Magistrate Judge 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 For the Northern District of California UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER (C 12-06575 JSW (LB)) 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?