Google Inc. v. American Blind & Wallpaper Factory, Inc.
Filing
104
Attachment 2
Declaration in Support of
102 MOTION to Compel
ABWF to (1) Produce Documents, (2) Produce an Affidavit, and (3) Schedule Depositions filed byGoogle Inc., Google Inc.. (Attachments: #
1 Exhibit A#
2 Exhibit B#
3 Exhibit C#
4 Exhibit D#
5 Exhibit E#
6 Exhibit F#
7 Exhibit G#
8 Exhibit H#
9 Exhibit I#
10 Exhibit J#
11 Exhibit K#
12 Exhibit L#
13 Exhibit M#
14 Exhibit N)(Related document(s)
102) (Krishnan, Ajay) (Filed on 6/8/2006)
Google Inc. v. American Blind & Wallpaper Factory, Inc.
Doc. 104 Att. 2
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 1 of 24
EXHIBIT B
"
Dockets.Justia.com
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
, .. "
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 2 of 24
RECEIVED
Robert N. Phillips (SBN 120970) Ethan B. Andelman (SBN 209101)
!, ;t 'I I ¡, liu' ~YH\l I''~ .., ¡UH 4 " 2t\05
'". ~--1E3T
1
2
3
HOWRY, LLP
525 Market Street, Suite 3600 San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 848-4900
4 Facsimile: (415) 848-4999
5
David A. RameIt (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) Susan J. Greenspon (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
6 Dawn M. Beery (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
KELLEY DRYE & WARN LLP
7
8
333 West Wacker Drive, Suite 2600 Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (312) 857-7070
Facsimile: (312) 857-7095
9
Attorneys for Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff 10 AMRICAN BLIN AND W ALLP APER FACTORY, INC.
11
12
13 GO
UNTED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN
OGLE INC., a Delaware corporation,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No. C03-5340-JF (EAI)
14
15
16 AMERICAN
17 d//a decoratetoday.com, Inc.; and DOES 1-
BLIN & WALLPAPER FACTORY,INe., a Delaware corporation
AMERICAN BLIND & W ALLP APER FACTORY, INC.'S RESPONSES TO OGLE, INC.'S FIRST SET OF GO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND THINGS
18 100, inclusive, Defendants.
19
AMERICAN BLIN & W ALLP APER 20 FACTORY, INe., a Delaware corporation
21 d//a decoratetoday.com, Inc.,
22 23
v.
Counter - Plainti ff,
24 GOOGLE, INC., AMERICA ONLIN, INC., NETS CAPE COMMUCATIONS CORPORATION, COMPUSERVE 25 INTERACTIVE SERVICES, INC., ASK
26 JEEVES, INC., and EARTHLIN, INe.
27 28
HOWREY LLP American Blind's Responses to Google's First Set of Document
Counter- Defendants/
Requests
Case No. C03-5340 JF (EAI)
DM_US\8iI47&4.vl
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 3 of 24
1
Third- Party Defendants
2
3
PROPOUNING PARTY: PLAINTIFF/COUNTER-DEFENDANT GOOGLE, INe.
RESPONDING PARTY:
4
DEFENDANT/COUNTER.PLAINTIFF AMERICAN BLIN & WALLPAPER FACTORY, INC.
ONE
5 SET NUBER:
6 Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff American Blind & Wallpaper Factory, Inc. ("American Blind")
7 hereby answers PlaintiffCounter-Defendant Google, Inc.'s First Set Of
Requests For Production Of
8 Documents And Things From American Blind & Wallpaper Factory, Inc. as follows:
9
REQUESTS
10 REQUEST NO.1:
11 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO AMERICAN BLIND's selection, adoption and clearance of each ofthe AMERICAN BLIN MAS, including, but not limited to, searches, investigations,
12 reports and opinions.
13 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO.1:
14 American Blind objects to this request because it is overbroad, unduly burdensome, and not
15
reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of
relevant or admissible evidence. American Blind also
16
objects to "this request to the extent that it calls for the production of documents protected by the
17
attorney client privilege or the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving these
18
19 objections, American Blind states that it will produce any responsive documents in its possession
20 regarding the adoption and clearance of each of the American Blind Marks.
21 REQUEST NO.2:
22 All DOCUMENTS demonstrating that AMERICAN BLIN owns the AMERICAN BLIN
23
MAS.
24 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO.2: Responsive documents wil be produced.
25
26 REQUEST NO.3:
27 28
HOWREY LLP
American Blind's Responses to Google's First Set of
All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO AMERICAN BLIND's first commercial use of each of the
AMERICAN BLIN MAR.
-2-
Documents Requests
Case No. C03.5340 JF (EAI)
nM 1l"\R1147R4" i
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 4 of 24
1 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO.3:
2 American Blind objects to this request because it is overbroad, unduly burdensome, and not
3 reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admissible evidence. Specifically,
4
5
Google's request for all documents related to American Blind's first commercial use ofthe American
Blind Marks is overbroad and unduly burdensome. Subject to and without waiving these objections,
6
responsive documents will be produced that illustrate the date of
first commercial useofthe American
7
8 Blind Marks.
9 REQUEST NO.4:
each ofthe
10 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO AMERICAN BLIND's first use of
AMRICAN BLIN DOMAIN NAMES.
11
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO.4:
12
American Blind objects to this request because it is vague, ambiguous, overbroad, unduly
13
14 burdensome, and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery afrelevant or admissible evidence.
15 Specifically, the phrase American Blind Domain Names is vague and ambiguous because Google
16 defines the term to mean a certain list of domain names (as set fort at page 2, paragraph 5 of Google
17 Inc.'s First Set Of Requests For Production Of
Documents And Thngs From American Blind &
18
Wallpaper Factory, Inc.) and then includes "any other Internet domain name owned by or on behalf of
19
American Blind though which customers may purchase American Blind's products or services."
American Blind owns approximately 500 Internet domain names, but at present it 'only actively uses
20
21
22 and markets approximately 12 domain names. Moreover, American Blind does not generally maintain
23 records for each individual domain name, rather information for all domain names owned by American
24 Blind is collected and maintained together. To the extent that this request calls for the production of
25 documents related to all 500 domain names owned by American Blind, it is overbroad and unduly
26
burdensome. Subject to
27
28 -3American Blind's Responses to Google's First Set of
and without waiving these objections, American Blind will produce a listing
of domain names owned by American Blind. To the extent that Google wants detailed information on
Documents Requests
HOWREY UP
Case No. C03-5340 JF (EAI)
DM US\8214784.vl
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 5 of 24
1 each of
these domain names, that information is publicly available through the Internet at
2 ww.enom.com.
3
REQUEST NO.5:
Copies of all advertising and promotional materials featuring the AMERICAN BLIN NAMES. AMERICAN BLIN DOMA
4
5 MARS or
6 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO.5:
7 American Blind objects to this request because it is vague, ambiguous, overbroad, unduly
8 burdensome, and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admissible evidence.
9 As an initial matter, the phrase American Blind Domain Names is vague and ambiguous because
10
11
Google Inc.'s First Set Of Requests For Production Of
Google defines the term to mean a certain list of domain names (as set forth at page 2, paragraph 5 of
Documents And Thngs From American Blind
12
13 & Wallpaper Factory, Inc.) and then includes "any other Internet domain name owned by or on behalf
14 of American Blind through which customers may purchase American Blind's products or services."
15 American Blind owns approximately 500 Internet domain names, but at present it only actively uses
16 and markets approximately 12 domain names. Moreover, American Blind does not generally maintain
17
records for each individual domain name, rather information for all domain names owned by American
18 19
Blind is collected and maintained together. To the extent that this request calls for the production of
documents related to all 500 domain names owned by American Blind, it is overbroad and unduly
20
Moreover, American Blind spends millons of dollars each year advertising the
21 burdensome. 22 American Blind Marks and domain names, including pervasive advertising in
over forty national
23 magazines, on every major search engine, on national television and radio, and through milions of
24 direct mailings and catalogs distributed throughout the United States. American Blind has advertised
25
the American Blind Marks and domain names since its inception, and this request is not limited in
26
time. It would be extremely burdensome for American Blind to produce copies of all of its advertising
27
28
HOWREY LLP
American Blind's Responses to Google's First Set of
-4-
Documents Requests
DM US\8214784.vI "
Case No. C03-5340 JF (EAI)
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 6 of 24
1 and promotional materials ever created. Subject to and without waiving these objections, American
2 Blind will produce a sample of its more recent advertising and promotional materials.
3
REQUEST NO.6:
All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO AMERICAN BLIND's efforts to defend its trademarks
4
5 and domain names.
6 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO.6:
7 Americn Blind objects to this request because it is overbroad, unduly burdensome, and not
8 reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admissible evidence. As wrtten, this
9 request would require the production of every document submitted in every lawsuit brought by
10
11
American Blind to defend its trademark rights. These litigation files are voluminous and are not likely
to lead to the discovery ofrelevant or admis~ible evidence in this case. In addition, American Blind
12
13
objects to this request to the extent that it seeks the production of attorney/client privileged
14 communications. Subject to and without waiving these objections, American Blind will produce
15 copies of cease and desist letters sent to entities infrnging and/or diluting American Blind's
16 trademarks and copies of initial pleadings filed by American Blind seeking to protect its trademark
17 rights.
18
REQUEST NO.7:
All business plans, reports, analyses .and research RELATING TO the AMERICAN BLIN
forecasts, or projections.
19
20 MAS and AMERICAN BLIN DOMAIN NAMES, including, but not limited to, strtegic plans,
21
22 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO.7: American Blind has no documents responsive to this request.
23
24 REQUEST NO.8:
25 All of AMERICAN BLIND's quarterly and annual audited financial statements and annual
reports from 1997 to the present, including all corresponding notes and schedules.
26
27 28
HOWREY LLP
American Blind's Responses to Google's First Set of
-5-
Documents Requests
Case No. C03-5340 JF (EAT)
DM US\8214784.vl
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 7 of 24
1 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO.8:
2
3 American Blind objects to this request because it is overbroad, unduly burdensome, and not
4 reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admissible evidence. To the extent that
5
this request calls for the production of notes and schedules to American Blind's audited financial
6
7
statements, it is overbroad and unduly burdensome. American Blind will produce its annual audited financial statements from 1997 to the present. American Blind states that it does not prepare quarterly
8
9
audited financial statements.
10 REQUEST NO.9:
11 All DOCUMENTS demonstmting AMERICAN BLIND's monthly gross revenues from
products and services sold under the AMERICAN BLIN MARS from the first use of those marks 12 to the present.
13 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO.9:
14 American Blind objects to this request as over broad and unduly burdensome. Revenues from
15 products and services sold under the American Blind Marks is equivalent to total company revenues
16
because virtally all, ifnot all, of
the products and services sold by American Blind are sold under the
17
American Blind Marks. As a result, the quantity of documents demonstrating monthly gross revenues
18
19 for American Blind is extremely voluminous and would be very burdensome to assemble and produce.
20 In addition, American Blind has been using its Marks since at least 1986 and it would be extremely
21 burdensome, if not impossible, to produce documents relating to monthly gross revenues for such a
22 long time period. Subject to and without waiving these objections, American Blind states that it will
23
produce annual audited
financial statements from 1997 to the present.
24
REQUEST NO.1 0:
25
All DOCUMENTS demonstrating AMERICAN BLIN's monthly gross revenues from 26 products and services sold through the AMERICAN BLIN DOMAIN NAMES on a monthly basis from the first use ofthose domain namesto the present.
27
28
HOWREY LLP
American Blind's Responses to Google's First Set of
-6-
Documents Requests
Case No. C03-5340 JF (EAI)
DM,US\8Z147&4_vl ,
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 8 of 24
1 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 10:
2 American Blind objects to this request because it is vague, ambiguous, overbroad, unduly
3 burdensome, and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admssible evidence.
4
5
As an initial matter, the phrase American Blind Domain Names is vague and ambiguous because
Google defines the term to mean a certain list of domain names (as set forth at page 2, paragraph 5 of
Google Inc.'s First Set Of Requests For Production Of
6
Documents And Things From American Blind
7
or on behalf
8 & Wallpaper Factory, Inc.) and then includes "any other Internet domain name owned by
9 of American Blind through which customers may purchase American Blind's products or services."
10 American Blind owns approximately 500 Internet domain names, but at present it only actively uses
11 and markets approximately 12 domain names. Moreover, American Blind does not generally maintain
12 13
records for each individual domain name, rather information for all domain names owned by American
Blind is collected and maintained together. To the extent that this request calls for the production of
14
17 and/or separate revenues from or
between its hitemetdomain names and its toll-free telephone
18 numbers. For example, customers often shop for products on American Blind's website and then call
19 its toll-free number to place an order. It is unclear from Google's request whether such sales would
20
21
qualify as made "through the Amencan Blind domain names" or not. Subject to and without waiving
these objections, American Blind states that it wil produce annual audited financial statements from
22
23 1997 to the present.
24 REQUEST NO. 11:
25 All DOCUMENTS demonstrating AMERICANBLIN MARS from themonthly profits and/or lossesmarks BLIND's first use of those for
products and services sold under the AMERICAN
26 to the present.
27
28
HOWREY llP
American Blind's Responses to Google's First Set of
-7-
Documents Requests
DM US\82147¡t4.vl
Case No. C03-5340 JF (EAl)
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 9 of 24
1 RESPONSE TO REQUEST
NO.l1:
2 American Blind objects to this request as over broad and unduly burdensome. Profits and/or
3 losses from products and servces sold under the American Blind Marks is equivalent to total
company
4
5
profits and/or losses because virtally all, if not all, of the products and services sold by Ameriçan
Blind are sold under the American Blind Marks. As a result, the quantity of documents demonstrating
6
monthly profits and/or losses for American Blind is extremely voluminous and would be very
7
8 burdensome to assemble and produce. In addition, American Blind has been using its Marks since at
9 least 1986, and it would be extremely burdensome, if not impossible, to produce
documents relating to
10 monthly profits and/or losses for such a long time period. Subject to and without waiving these
11 objections, American Blind states that it will produce anual audited financial statements from 1997 to
12
13
the present.
REQUEST NO. 12:
14
All DOCUMENTS demonstrating AMERICAN BLIND's monthly profits and/or losses for 15 products and services sold though the AMERICAN BLIN DOMAIN NAMES on a monthly basis from the first use ofthose domain names to the present.
16
17 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 12: American Blind objects to this request because it is vague, ambiguous, overbroad, unduly
18 19
burdensome, and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admissible evidence.
20 As an initial matter, the phrase American Blind Domain Names is vague and ambiguous because
21
Google defines the term to mean a certain list of domain mimes (as set forth at page 2, paragraph 5 of
Google Inc.'s First Set Of Requests For Production Of Documents And
22
23
Things From American Blind
& Wallpaper Factory, Inc.) and then includes "any other Internet domain name owned by or on behalf
24
25
of American Blind though which customers may purchase American Blind's products or services."
American Bliiid owns approximately 500 Internet domain names, but at present it only actively uses
and markets approximately 12 domain names. Moreover, American Blind does not generally maintain
-8-
26
r-
27 28
HOWREY LLP
American Blind's Respnses to GoogJe's First Set of
Documents Requests
Case No. C03-5340 JF (EAl)
DM ii~\R7T47R4,vT
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 10 of 24
1 records for each individual domain name, rather information for all domain names owned by American
2 Blind is collected and maintained together. To the extent that this request calls for the production of
3
documents related to all 500 domain names owned by American Blind, it is overbroad and unduly
4
5
burdensome. In addition, it is very diffcult for American Blind to attempt with accuracy to divide
and/or separate profits and/or losses from or between its Internet domain names and its toll-free
6
7 telephone numbers. For example, customers often shop for products on American Blind's website and
8 then call its toll-free number to place an order. It is unclear from Google's request whether such sales
9 would qualify as made "though the American Blind domain names" or not. Subject to and without
10 waiving these objections, American Blind states that it will produce annual audited financial
11
statements from 1997 to the present.
12
REQUEST NO. 13:
13
All DOCUMENTS demonstrating AMERICAN BLIND'S monthly advertising and
14 promotional expenditues for products or services marketed under the AMERICAN BLIN MAKS
15
from the first use of those marks to the present.
16 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 13:
17
18
Since all of American Blind's products and services are marketed
under the American Blind
Marks, this request is actually requesting all documents demonstrating American Blind's monthly
advertising and promotional expenditues. American Blind objects to
19
this request because it is vague,
20 ambiguous, overbroad, unduly burdensome, and notreasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of
21
relevant or admissible evidence. As an initial matter, the phrase "advertising and promotional
expenditures" is vague and ambiguous because it is unclear what fixed and/or variable expenses qualify in Google's view as "expenditures," nor has Google made any distinction between marketing
22
23
24
25
expenditures and what are properly includable as advertising and promotional expenditures. In
26 addition, this request is overbroad because American Blind began using its Marks as early as 1986, and
1"
27
it would be too burdensome to produce documents dating from 1986,
assuming that they even exist.
-9-
28
HOWRE LLP
American Blind's Responses to Google's First Set of
Documents Requests
C."se No. C03-5340 JF (EAI) a llC\O"llA"7Q;I ",.1 nl
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 11 of 24
1 Subject to and without waiving these objections, American Blind states that it will produce documents
2 generally evidencing anual advertising expenditues.
3
REQUEST NO. 14:
All DOCUMENTS demonstrating AMERICAN BLIND's monthly advertising and
4
5 promotional expenditues for products and services sold though the AMERICAN BLIN DOMAIN NAMS from the first use of those domain names to the present.
6
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 14:
7
American Blind objects to this request because it is vague, ambiguous, overbroad, unduly
8
9
burdensome, and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admi.ssible evidence.
10 As an initial matter, the phrase American Blind Domain Names is vague and ambiguous because
11 Google defines the term to mean a certain list of domaiii names (as set forth at page 2, paragraph 5 of
12 Google Inc.'s First Set Of Requests For Production Of
Documents And Things From American Blind
13
& Wallpaper Factory, Inc.) and then includes ..any other Internet domain name owned by or on behalf
14
15
of American Blind though which customers may purchase American Blind's products or services."
19 Blind is collected and maintained together. To the extent that this request calls for the production of
20 documents related to all 500 domain names owned by American Blind, it is overbroad and unduly
21
burdensome. In addition, the phrase ..advertising and promotional expenditues" is vague and
ambiguous because it is unclear what fixed and/or variable expenses qualify in Google's view as
22 23
.'expenditues," nor has GoogJe made any distinction between marketing
expenditures and what are
24
25 properly includable as advertising and promotional expenditures. In addition, this request is overbroad
26 because American Blind began using its domain names many years ago, and it would be too ,
27 burdensome to produce documents from such a long time ago, assuming that they even exist. Finally,
28
HOWREY LlP
American Blind's Responses to Google's First Set of
-10-
Documents ReqUests
Case No. C03-5340 JF (EAl)
T'M ii.C:ISI?lil7S1il,,1
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 12 of 24
1 American Blind's advertising expenditures are not necessarily separated to reflect advertising
2 expenditures for products and services sold through the American Blind domain names as opposed to
3
through other channels. Subject to and without waiving these objections, American Blind states that it
4
5
wil produce documents generally evidencing annual advertising expenditures.
REQUEST NO. 15:
6
All DOCUMNTS identifyng the weekly number of 7 reachable through the AMRICAN BLIN DOMAI NAMES from the first use of hits received by each of
the websites those domain
8 names to the present.
9 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 15:
10
American Blind objects to this request because it is vague, ambiguous, overbroad, unduly
1 1 burdensome, and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admissible evidence.
12 As an initial matter, the phrase American Blind Domain Names is vague and ambiguous because
13 GoogJe defines the term to mean a certain list of domain names (as set forth at page 2, paragraph 5 of
14
15
Google Inc.' s First Set Of Requests For Production Of Documents And Thngs From American Blind
& Wallpaper Factory, Inc.) and then includes "any other Internet domain name owned by or on behalf
16
17 of American Blind through which customers may purchase American Blind's products or services."
18 American Blind owns approximately 500 Internet domain names, but at present it only actively uses
19 and markets approximately 12 domain names. Moreover, American Blind does not generally maintain
20 records of "hits" for each individual domain name; rather information for all domain names owned by
21
American Blind is collected and maintained together. To the extent that this request calls for the
production
22
23
of documents related to an 500 domain names owned by American Blind, it is overbroad
24
and unduly burdensome. In addition, American Blind has been using certain of its domain names for
25 many years and this request, which calls for the production of document from the first use of the
26 domain names to the present is overbroad in its time frame. Finally, this request is vague and
27 ambiguous because it is unclear what exactly Google means by the phrase "number of
hits received."
28
HOWREY LLP
-llAmerican Blind's Responses to Google's Fírst Set ofDc)Cuments Requests
Case No. C03-5340 JF (EA1)
DM US\8214784.vl
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 13 of 24
1 REQUEST NO. 16:
2 All DOCUMENTS identifyng the weekly number of unque users accessing the web
sites
reachable though the AMERICAN BLIN DOMA NAMS from the first use ofthose domain 3 names to the present.
. 4 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 16:
5
American Blind objects to this request because it is vague, ambiguous, overbroad, unduly
burdensome,and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admissible evidence.
6
7
As an intial matter, the phrase American Blind Domain Names is vague and ambiguous because
8
9
10
Google defines the term to mean a certain list of domain names (as set forth at page 2, paragraph 5 of
Google Inc.'s First Set Of Requests For Production Of
Documents And Thngs From American Blind
1i & Wallpaper Factory, Inc.) and then includes "any other Internet domain name owned by or on behalf
12
13
of American Blind through which customers may purchase American Blind's products or services."
American Blind owns approximately 500 Internet domain names, but at present it only actively uses
14
15
and markets approximately 12 domain names. Moreover, American Blind does not generally maintain
records for each individual domain name; rather information for all domain names owned by American
16
17
Blind is collected and maintained together. To the extent that this request calls for the production of
documents related to all 500 domain names owned by
18
American Blind, it is overbroad and unduly
19 burdensome. In addition, American Blind has been using certain of its domain names for many years
20 and this request, which calls for the production of document from the first use of the domain names to
21
the present is overbroad in its time frame. Finally, this request is vague and ambiguous because it is
22
23
unclear what exactly Google means by the phrase "unique users." For example, if a consumer visits
the American Blind website on Monday and then again on Tuesday, does he/she only constitute one
unique user for that week? In contrast, if a consumer visits the American Blind website on Friday and
24
25
26 then again the following Monday, does he/she constitute a separate unique user for both weeks?
i ,~
27
28
HOWREY lLP
American Blind's Responses to Google's First Set of
-12-
Case No. C03-5340 JF (EAl) ,
DM_US\82J4784.vl
Documents Requests
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 14 of 24
1 REQUEST NO. 17:
2 All DOCUMNTS RELATING TO COMMICA nONS between AMERICAN BLIN AN GOOGLE.
3
4 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 17: American Blind objects to this request because it is over broad, unduly burdensome, and not
5
6 reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admissible evidence. American Blind
7 presently is a customer of Google and, therefore, regularly communicates with Google representatives
8 concernng business matters, including but not limited to American Blind's advertising campaign with
9 Google. In addition, this request is overbroad because it is not limited to any definite period of time
10
11
and American Blind has been doing business with Google for many years. Subject to and without
waiving these objections, American Blind will produce electronic communcations between American
12
the
13 Blind and Google regarding Google's sale of American Blind's trademarks as keywords as part of
14 AdW ords program, as wen as monthly invoices received from Google concerning American Blind's
15 paricipation in Google's AdWords program.
16 REQUEST NO.
18:
17 All DOCUMNTS RELATING TO COMMCATIONS between AMERICAN BLIN and
DEFENDANTS.
18 the THIR-PARTY
18:
19 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO.
20
American Blind objects to ths request because it is over broad, unduly burdensome, and not
relevant or admissible evidence. American Blind has
21 reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of
22 communicated with the third-party defendants concerning business matters, including but not limited
23 to potential advertising campaigns, which have no relevance to the current dispute. Subject to and
24
25
without waiving these objections, American Blind states that it has no documents relating to direct
communications with the third-pary defendantsregarding the sale of American Blind's trademarks as
26
27 keywords.
28
HOWREY LLP
American Blind's Responses to Google's First Set of
-13-
Documents Requests
nM 1 J"IRì 147R4 v 1
Case No. C03-5340 JF (EAI)
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 15 of 24
1 REQUEST NO. 19:
2 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO any trademark, servicemark, trade name, Internet domain
3 assignent or otherwse, for
name, or any other application/registration owned by or on behalf of AMRICAN BLIN, through any name, mark, or designation comprised of or containing the
4 AMERICAN BLIN MARS, or any variation thereof.
5 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 19:
6 Responsive documents, to the extent that they exist, will be produced.
7 REQUEST NO. 20:
8 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO any research, reports, surveys, investigations, or studies
conducted by or on behalf of AMERICAN BLIN, relating to consumer or customer perception,
9 understanding or recognition of any name, mark or designation comprised of or containing the
10
AMERICAN BLIN MARS, or any variation thereof
11 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 20:
12
American Blind objects tò this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is prematue given that
13 American Blind has not yet received meaningful discovery responses from Google and has not yet had
14 an opportnity to take any depositions in this case. American Blind fuer objects to this
15 Interrogatory on the ground that it seeks information that wil likely be the subject of expert testimony
16
prior to the time for disclosure of
expert opinions. American Blind further objects to this request to the
17
extent it calls for the production of documents protected by the attorney/client privilege and/or the
18
attorney work product doctrne. Subject to and without waiving these objections, American Blind will
19
20 produce responsive non-privileged documents, to the extent that they exist, regarding consumer or
21 customer perceptions of
the American Blind Marks.
22 REQUEST NO. 21:
23 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO GOOGLE or any of
the THIR-PARTY DEFENDANTS.
24 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 21:
25
American Blind objects to this request because it is over broad, unduly burdensome, and not
reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admissible evidence. Ths request is so
26
27
overbroàd as to be without meaning.
28
HOWREY UP
American Blind's Responses to Google's First Set of
-14-
nlrll l1Q\2'l1.d7RLI v1 .
Case No. C03-5340 JF (EAl)
Documents Requests
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 16 of 24
1 REQUEST NO. 22:
2 DOCUMENTS identifying AMRICAN BLIND's corporation strctue, including divisions
and departents.
3
4 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 22: Responsive documents, to the extent that they exist, wil be produced.
5
6 REQUEST NO. 23: DOCUMENTS identifying AMERICAN BLIND's employees and their job descriptions.
7
8 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 23:
9
American Blind objects to this request because it is over broad, unduly burdensome, and not
10 reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admissible evidence. American Blind has
11
more thana hundred employees, each with slightly varng
job descriptions. To the extent that this
these
12
request seeks each employee's job description, it is overbroad. Subject to and without waiving
13
objections, American Blind will produce an employee roster identifyng the individuals that
presently
\J
14
work for American Blind andthe department in which they work.
15
16 REQUEST NO. 24:
17 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO AMERICAN BLIND's allegation that "Defendant Google actively solicits others to purchase not only American Blind's registered and unegistered trademarks,
18 but also virtally every conceivable iteration
of these marks."
19 RESPONSE TO REQUEST
NO. 24:
20 American Blind objects to this request to the extent it calls for the production of documents
21 protected by the
attorney/client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrne. Subject to and
22 23 24
without waiving ths objection, responsive documents, to the extent that they exist, wil be produced.
However, American Blind believes that the requested documents are largely within the possession and
custody of
Google and American Blind's competitors. Discovery and investigation continue and this
25
26 response may be supplemented as required.
27 28
HOWRE llP
American Blind's Responses to Google's First Set of
-15-
Documents Requests
Ç_a~~ N~~.Ç~.?-5?40 JF (EAI)
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 17 of 24
1 REQUEST NO. 25:
2 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO AMERICAN BLIND's allegation that "Defendants have
3 to
deliberately manpulated their search engine 'results' so that, when consumers use these search engines find American Blind's products and services, the consumers are unwittingly diverted to competitors'
4 products and services."
5 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 25:
6
American Blind objects to this request to the extent it calls forthe production of
documents
7 protected by the attorney/client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrne., Subject to and
8 without waiving this objection, responsive
documents, to the extent that they exist, will be produced.
9 However, American Blind believes that the requested documents are largely within the possession and
10
custody of Google and American Blind's competitors. Discovery and investigation continue and
this
11
response may be supplemented as required.
12
13 REQUEST NO. 26: All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO AMRICAN BLIND's contention that "the American 14 outstanding celebrity as a source of quality home decorating products have acquired an Blind Marks
15 and related services."
16 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 26:
17 American Blind objects to this request because it is overbroad and unduly burdensome because
18 it would require the production of all of American Blind's advertising, marketing, and promotional
i 9 materials. American Blind furter objects to this request on the ground that it seeks information that
20
21
will likely be the subject of expert testimony prior to the time for disclosure of expert opinons.
American Blind objects to this request to the extent it calls for the production of documents protected
22
23
by the attorney/client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without
24 waiving these objections, responsive documents, to the extent that they exist, will be produced.
25 REQUEST NO. 27:
26 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO AMERICAN BLIND's contention that "(t)he public has
used and now uses the American Blind Marks to'identify American Blind and its home decorating
27
28
HOWREY lLP
American Blind's Responses to Google's First Set of
-16-
Documents Requests
Div i iC;\ll7147R4 vI
Case No. C03-5340 JF (EAI)
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 18 of 24
1 products and related services from the
home decorating products and related services offered by
others(.)"
2
4
3 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 27: American Blind objects to this request because it is overbroad and unduly burdensome because
5 it would require the production of all of American Blind's advertising, marketing, and promotional
6 materials. American Blind further objects to this request on the ground that it seeksinformatiön that
7 will likely be the subject of expert testimony prior to the time for disclosure of expert opinions.
8 American Blind objects to this request to the extent it calls for the production of documents protected
9
by the attorney/client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without
waiving these objections, responsive documents, to the extentthat they exist, will be produced.
10
11
12 REQUEST NO. 28:
13 AllpDOCUMENTS itself confsingTO AMERICAN BLIND's allegation that "(t)he designation 'S onsored Link' Is RELATING and misleading."
14
15
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 28:
American Blind objects to this Interrogatory on the ground that it seeks information that wil
likely be the subject of expert testimony prior to the time for disclosure of expert opinions. American
16 17
18
Blind objects to this request to the extent it calls for the production of documents protected by the
19 attorney/client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrne. Subject to and without waiving
20 these objections, American Blind states that it does not presently have in its possession documents that
21 relate to the interpretation of Google's use ofthe word "Sponsored." American Blind believes that
22 there are numerous such documents In the possession of Google and other third paries.
23
REQUEST NO. 29:
All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO AMERICAN BLIND's allegation that "Google has sold
24
25 many keywords comprised, in whole or in part, of the American Blind marks, to competitors of
American Blind:'
26
27
28
HOWREY UP
American Blind's Responses to Google's First Set of
-17-
Documents Requests
C..ase No. 1C03~5340 JF (EAI) ,,'I l' IP'\ 0.. A"7o.A ~.1
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 19 of 24
1 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 29:
2 American Blind objects to this request to the extent it calls for the production of documents
3 protected by the attorney/client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and
4
5
without waiving these objections, responsive documents, to the extent that they exist, wil be produced.
However, American Blind believes that the requested documents are largely within the possession and
6
custody of Google and American Blind's competitors. Discovery and investigation continue and this
7
8 response may be supplemented as required.
9 REQUEST NO. 30:
10 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO AMERICAN BLIND's allegation that "Google. . .
actively promotes and encourages competitors to embark on a sweeping competitive raid on the 1 1 American Blind Marks and virtally every conceivable, though indistinguishable, iteration ofthose
marks. "
12
13 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 30:
American Blind objects to this request to the extent it
calls for the production of documents
14
15 protected by the attorney/client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and
16 without waiving these objections, responsive documents, to the extent that they exist, wil be produced.
17 However, American Blind believes that the requested documents are largely within the possession and
18
custody of
Google and American Blind's competitors.
19
REQUEST NO. 31:
20
All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO AMERICAN BLIND's allegation that "Google 21 intentionally has designed its financially lucrative' AdWords' program to maximize the infrngement and dilution of American Blind's marks."
22
23 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 31: American Blind objects to this request to the extent it calls for the production of documents 24
25 protected by the attorney/client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and
26 without waiving these objections, responsive documents, to the extent that they exist, will be
produced.
27
28
HOWREY LLP
American Blind's Responses to Google's First Set of
-18-
Documents Requests
Case No. C03-5340 JF (EAI)
DM lJS\l!214784.vl
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 20 of 24
1 However, American Blind believes that the requested documents are largely within the possession and
2 custody of
Google and American Blind's competitors.
3
REQUEST NO. 32:
All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO AMERICAN BLIND's allegation that "Google has
4
5 knowingly sold the American Blind Marks in commerce and included them in Google's search engine for Google's own profit and to increase the competitive advantage of American Blind's competitors."
6
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 32:
7
American Blind objects to this request
to the extent it calls for the production of documents
8
protected by the attorney/client privilege
9
and/or the attorney work product doctrne. Subject to and
10 without waiving these objections, responsive documents, to the extent that they exist, will be produced.
11 However, American Blind believes that the requested documents
are largely within the possession and
12 custody of Google and American Blind's competitors.
13 REQUEST NO. 33:
14
All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO AMERICAN BLIND's allegation that "Google adopted
15 and used this former trademark policy because it believed it would be, or could be, found liable for
trademark infrngement or other related claims ¡fit did not block such purchases."
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 33:
16
17
American Blind objects to this request to the extent it calls for the production of documents
18 19
protected by the attorney/client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and
20 without waiving these objections, responsive documents, to the extent that they exist, will be produced.
21 However, American Blind believes that the requested documents are largely withi the possession and
22 custody of Google and American Blind's competitors.
23 REQUEST NO. 34:
24
All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO AMRICAN
BLIND's allegation that "Defendants and
25 their advertisers are wrongfully profiting off of the goodwil and reputation of trademark owners such as American Blind." 26
27 28
HOWREY UP
American Blind's Responses to Google's First Set of
-19-
Documents Requests
Case No. C03-5340 JF (EAI)
OM I ii;\~?ld7Rd vl
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 21 of 24
1 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 34:
2 American Blind objects to this request to the extent it calls for the production of documents
3 protected by the attorney/client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and
4
5
without waiving these objections, responsive documents, to the extent that they exist, will be produced.
However, American Blind believes that the requested documents are largely within the possession and
custody of
6
Google and American Blind's competitors.
7
NO. 35:
8 REQUEST
search engines are deceptive and mislead consumers into believing falsely that the website lins to 10 which they are directed via manpulated search 'results' links are sponsored or authorized by and/or originat(e) from American Blind(.l"
11
9 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO AMERICAN BLIND's allegation that "Defendants'
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 35:
12
American Blind objects to this Interrogatory on the ground that it seeks information that will
13
14
likely be the subject of expert testimony prior to the time for disclosure of expert opinions. American
15 Blind objects to this request to the extent it calls for the production óf documents protected by the
16 attorney/client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving
17 these objections, responsive documents, to the extent that they exist, will be produced.
18 19
REQUEST NO. 36:
All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO AMERICAN BLIND's allegation that "(t)he manipulated
as a source of its goods
20 search engine 'results,' . . . dilute the ability of the American Blind Marks to identify American Blind
and servces."
21
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 36:
22
American Blind objects to this Interrogatory on the ground that it seeks information that will
23
24
likely be the subject of expert testimony prior to the time for disclosure of expert opinions. American
25 Blind objects to this request to the extent it calls for the production of documents protected by the
26 attorney/client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving
27 these objections, responsive documents, to the extent that they exist, wil be produced.
28
HOWREY LLP
Ámerican Blind's Responses to Google's First Set of
-20-
Documents Requests
Case No. C03-5340 JF (EAI) n~A TTC'\n"llA'7O'A ....1
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 22 of 24
1 REQUEST NO. 37:
2 All DOCUMNTS RELATING TO AMERICAN BLIND's aUegation that "American Blind's
customers have been and will likely continue to be confused about the origin and sponsorship of the 3 companies other than American Blind listed by the Defendants in their deceptive search engine
'results.' "
4
5 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 37:
6 American Blind objects to this Interrogatory on the ground that it seeks information that will
7 likely be the subject of expert testimony prior to the time for disclosure of expert opinions. American
8 Blind objects to this request to the extent it calls for the production of documents protected by the
9 attorney/client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving
10 these objections, responsive documents, to the extent that they exist, will be produced.
11 REQUEST NO. 38:
12 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO AMERICAN BLIND's allegation that "Defendants'
actions steal customers from American Blind's website, divert consumers
to inferior products and i 3 services, erode the distinctiveness of American Blind's Marks, and impair American Blind's honest and good faith efforts to promote and sell its products on the Internet."
14
RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 38:
15
American Blind objects to this Interrogatory on the ground that it seeks information that will
16
17 likely be the subject of expert testimony prior to the time for disclosure of expert opinions. American
18 Blind objects to this request to the extent it calls for the production of documents protected by the
19 attorney/client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving
20 these objections, responsive documents, to the extent that they exist, wil be produced.
21
REQUEST NO. 39:
All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO AMERlCAN BLIND's allegation that "Defendants' 23 actions have caused damage and irreparable injur to American Blind."
24 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 39:
22
25 American Blind objects to this Interrogatory on the ground that it seeks information that wil
26 likely be the subject of expert testimony prior to the time for disclosure of expert opinions. American
28 -2127
HOWREY LLP
Blind objects to this request to the extent it calls for the production of documents protected by the
American Blind's Responses to Google's First Set of Documents Requests Case No. C03-5340 JF (EAI)
lìl\A 11~\Sl,)ld7QLf ,,1 .
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 23 of 24
1 attorney/client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving
2 these objections, responsive documents, to the extent that they exist, will be produced.
3
REQUEST NO. 40:
All DOCUMENTS identified in, RELATING TO, or which were relied upon in responding to
4
5 Google's First Set ofInteITogatories to American Blind.
6 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 40:
7 Responsive documents wil be produced.
8 REQUEST NO. 41:
9 All DOCUMNTS upon which AMERICAN BLIN wil rely in this lawsuit.
10 RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 41:
11
Responsive documents will be produced.
12
13
Dated:
14
15
June 10, 2005
HOWRY LLP
16
17 18
By:
ROBERT N. PHILLIPS
~
ETH B. ANELMAN
David A. Ramelt
Susan J. Greenspon Dawn M. Beery
19
KELLEYDRYE & WARNLLP
20
21
333 West Wacker Drve, Suite 2600 Chicago, IL 60606
Attorneys for Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff AMERICAN BLIN AND W ALLP APER FACTORY, INC.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
HOWREY LLP
American Blind's Responses to Google's First Set of
-22-
Documents Requests
faseT1~\Q,)1~7~" ,,1 T"M No. C03-5340 JF (EAI)
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 104-3
Filed 06/08/2006
Page 24 of 24
1
PROOF OF SERVICE
the United States and a resident of the State of
2 I am a citizen of
California. I am employed in San Francisco County, State of Californa, in the office of a member of the bar of this Court, at whose 3 direction the service was made. I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to the within
4 action. My business address is 525 Market Street, Suite 3600, San Francisco, CA 94105. On the date set forth below, I served the document(s) described below in the maner described below:
5
AMERICAN BLIND & WALLPAPER FACTORY, INC.'S RESPONSES TO GOOGLE, INC.'S 6 FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND THINGS
7
8
VI MESSENGER
Michael H. Page Mark A. Lemley
Ravind S'. Grewal
9
10
11
Keker & Van Nest, LLP
710 Sansome Street
San Francisco, CA 94111 Facsimile: (415) 397-7188
(BY FACSIMILE) I am personally and readily familiar with the business practice of Howrey Simon 12 Arold & White, LLP for collection and processing of document(s)to be transmitted by facsimile and I caused such document(s) on this date to be transmitted by facsimile to the offces of addTessee(s) at the numbers listed
13 below.
14
15 caused such document(s) described herein to be deposited for delivery to a facility regularly maintained by
(BY FEDERA EXPRESS) I am personally and readily familar with the business practice ofHowrey Simon Arold & White, LLP for collection and processing of correspondence for overnight delivery, and I
16
Federal ExpTessfoT overnight delivery.
17 XX/(BY MESSENGER hand delivery by this date. ' the document(s) to an authorized courer SERVICE) on consigning and or process server for
(BY U.S. MAIL) J am personally and readily familiar with the business practice of Howrey 19 SimondArold & White, LLP for collectionsuch processing of correspondence for mailing with the Unite States Postal Service, and I caused and envelope(s) with postage thereon fully prepaid to be
20 placed in the United States Postal Service at San Francisco, Californa.
21 18
Executed on June 10, 2005, at San Francisco, Califoibif '
22
23
... , () !_~ - /' ~
Patricia Cranmer
í cctLLCOlU/0L tI ( (Signature)
24
25
26
27
28
HOWREY SIMON
ARNOLD &
.wl.llT~
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?