Gametek LLC v. Zynga Inc.

Filing 63

Order by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu re 59 Discovery Letter Brief.(dmrlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/22/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
GAMETEK LLC,

12
13

Plaintiff,

No. C-13-02546 RS (DMR)
ORDER ON JOINT DISCOVERY
LETTER [DOCKET NO. 59]

v.

14

ZYNGA INC.,

15

Defendant.
___________________________________/

16
17

On October 29, 2013, Plaintiff Gametek LLC (“Gametek”) and Defendant Zynga Inc.

18

(“Zynga”) filed a joint discovery letter brief regarding Gametek’s motion to compel. [Docket No.

19

59.] The court conducted a hearing on the matter on November 21, 2013. This order summarizes

20

the rulings made by the court on the record during the hearing.

21

Gametek originally filed a lawsuit against Zynga and ten other defendants in the United

22

States District Court for the Southern District of California. The court dismissed Zynga due to

23

misjoinder. In December 2012, Gametek filed an action solely against Zynga in that same district.

24

In June 2013, the case was transferred to this court on Zynga’s motion. The Honorable Richard

25

Seeborg conducted an initial case management conference on September 19, 2013.

26

In its original suit, Gametek identified nineteen Zynga games that allegedly infringe its

27

patents. On October 24, 2013, Gametek identified one additional infringing game. Gametek now

28

seeks an order compelling Zynga to produce any and all documents responsive to its first set of

1

interrogatories and requests for production within thirty days. Counsel for Zynga represented that to

2

date, Zynga has made available for inspection all source code for the twenty accused games and has

3

produced all requested financial information for the nineteen original games. Financial information

4

for the twentieth game will be produced within the next seven days. Zynga is in the process of

5

gathering documents in two remaining categories of responsive documents -- game development and

6

marketing -- and will produce such documents on a rolling basis as they become available. Counsel

7

represented that Zynga anticipates substantial completion of its production of documents in these

8

remaining categories by February 2014.

9

Zynga appropriately phased the production of documents by prioritizing those that are
relevant to the core issues of infringement and damages. Zynga’s representations regarding further

11

search and production efforts are reasonable. In light of these representations, as well as the fact

12

that the Markman hearing is not scheduled to take place for over half a year (June 2, 2014) and

13

Judge Seeborg has yet to set a discovery cut-off date, the court finds that Zynga’s document

14

collection, review, and production process has been neither unreasonable nor dilatory. Therefore,

15

Gametek’s motion to compel is DENIED. The parties shall meet and confer regarding Gametek’s

16

request that Zynga prioritize certain categories of documents in the course of further collection,

17

review, and production of the remaining responsive documents.

RT

23

ER

H

24
25
26
27
28

2

R NIA

DONNA M. RYU na M. Ryu
n
United Judge Magistrate Judge
States Do

NO

22

Dated: November 22, 2013

FO

21

DERED

O OR
IT IS S

LI

20

A

IT IS SO ORDERED.

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT
U
O

19

S

18

UNIT
ED

For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C