Jobscience, Inc. v. CVPartners, Inc. et al

Filing 83

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS' DISCOVERY LETTER BRIEF REGARDING SOFTWARE CODE ANALYSIS ORDER. re 75 Letter; re 81 Stipulation. Signed by Judge Alsup on July 7, 2014. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/7/2014)

1
2
3
4
5

6
7
8

DAVID F. GROSS (Bar No. 083547)
[e-mail]
RAJIV DHARNIDHARKA (Bar No. 234756)
[e-mail]
DEBORAH MCCRIMMON (Bar No. 229769)
[e-mail]
DLA PIPER LLP (US)
555 Mission Street, Suite 2400
San Francisco, CA 94105-2933
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendants
CVPartners, Inc., Skipan LLC, Skipan Saas, LLC,
Brandon Metcalf and Kent Gray

9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
12
13

Plaintiffs,

14
15
16
17
18
19

CASE NO. CV 13-04519WHA

JOBSCIENCE, INC.,

v.
CVPARTNERS, INC., a California
Corporation; SKIPAN LLC, a Delaware
Limited Liability Company; SKIPAN SAAS
LLC, d.b.a. TALENT ROVER, a Delaware
Limited Liability Company; BRANDON
METCALF, an individual; KENT GRAY, an
individual; and DOES 1-100,

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED)
ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS'
DISCOVERY LETTER BRIEF
REGARDING SOFTWARE CODE
ANALYSIS ORDER (DKT. NO. 75)

Defendants.

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DLA PIPER LLP (US)
SAN FRANCISCO

WEST\248626947.1

STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS' DISCOVERY LEITER BRIEF
DKT. NO. 75 CASE NO. CV 13-04519WHA

1

On June 20, 2014, Defendants CVPartners, Inc., Skipan LLC, Skipan SaaS LLC, Brandon

2

Metcalf and Kent Gray (collectively "Defendants") filed a Discovery Letter Brief Regarding

3

Software Code Analysis Order ("Defendants' Letter Brief') with this Court. Dkt. No. 75. On

4

June 23, 2014, this Court ordered Plaintiff Jobscience, Inc. ("Plaintiff'') to file any response to

5

Defendants' Letter Brief by June 24, 2014 at 5:00p.m. Dkt. No. 76. In the same order, the Court

6

ordered the parties to meet and confer on June 26,2014 in the Court's jury room and to attend a

7

discovery hearing before Judge Alsup at 11:30 a.m. on June 26,2014 if the parties could not

8

resolve the matter. /d. On June 24, 2014, Plaintiff filed its Response to Defendants' Letter Brief.

9

Dkt. No. 77. Pursuant to the Court's June 23 order, counsel for the parties met and conferred in

10

the Court's jury room on June 26,2014. See Dkt. No. 76.

11

After meeting and conferring, the parties resolved the discovery disputes set forth in

12

Defendants' Letter Brief. See Dkt. No. 75. Specifically, the parties agreed to the following:

13

(1)

Defendants will provide counsel for Plaintiff a copy of the results database(s)

14

generated by Zeidman Consulting's (Defendants' experts) source code analysis, designated

15

"Confidential" under the terms of the stipulated protective order regarding confidentiality. See

16

Dkt. No. 40; see also Dkt. No. 62-1

17

database to determine if they contend it should not be provided to Zeidman Consulting in

18

electronic format for any reason. Concurrent with the provision of the results database(s) to

19

counsel for Plaintiff, Defendant Brandon Metcalf will also be provided a copy of the results

20

database(s) for his review.

21

(2)

~

6. Plaintiff and its counsel can then review the results

Counsel for Plaintiff will have two business days to review the results database(s)

22

to determine whether Plaintiff objects to allowing Zeidman Consulting to be given an electronic

23

copy of the results database(s) for any reason.

24

(3)

If Plaintiff does not provide a written objection to Defendants within two business

25

days of receiving the results database(s), an electronic copy of the results database(s) may be

26

provided to Zeidman Consulting. If Plaintiff's counsel makes an objection within two business

27

days of receiving the results database(s), the parties will meet and confer on the next business day

28

after receiving the written objection.
-2-

DLA PIPER LLP (US)
SAN FRANCISCO

WEST\248626947.1

STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS' DISCOVERY LETTER BRIEF
DKT. NO. 75 CASE NO. CV 13-04519WHA

1

(4)

If the meet and confer efforts described in paragraph (3) above fail to resolve the

2

outstanding dispute, Plaintiff will file a letter brief motion for a protective order preventing

3

Zeidman Consulting from receiving an electronic copy of the results database(s) by the next court

4

day after the meet and confer. If Plaintiff does not file a letter brief motion for a protective order

5

by this deadline, Defendants may provide Zeidman Consulting with an electronic copy of the

6

results database(s).

7

IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.

8

Dated: July 1, 2014
COUNSEL FORCE P.C.

9

By:

10

/s/ Patrick M. Terrv
Patrick M. Terry

11
Attorney for Plaintiff Jobscience, Inc.

12
13

Dated: July 1, 2014
DLA PIPER LLP (US)

14
By:

15
16

Is/ David F. Gross
David F. Gross

Attorneys for Defendants
CVPartners, Inc., Skipan LLC, Skipan
SaaS, LLC, Brandon Metcalf and Kent Gray

17
18
19
20

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

7
Dated: July_, 2014

21

Hon. -=~~==~~~~==~---HON. WILLIAM ALSUP
U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DLA PIPER LLP (US)
SAN FRANCISCO

-3WEST\248626947.1

STIPULATION & [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS' DISCOVERY LETTER BRIEF
DKT. NO. 75 CASE NO. CV 13-04519WHA