Google Inc. v. American Blind & Wallpaper Factory, Inc.

Filing 117

Declaration of MICHAEL H. PAGE In Support of Google Inc.'s Opposition to American Blind & Wallpaper, Inc.s [sic] Motion to Amend and Extend Case Management Order filed byGoogle Inc., Google Inc.. (Hamm, Klaus) (Filed on 6/15/2006)

Download PDF
Google Inc. v. American Blind & Wallpaper Factory, Inc. Doc. 117 Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF Document 117 Filed 06/15/2006 Page 1 of 5 1 KEKER & V AN NEST, LLP MICHAELH. PAGE - #154913 2 MAR A. LEMLEY - #155830 KLAUS H. HAMM - #224905 3 AJA Y S. KRSHNAN - #222476 710 Sansome Street 4 San Francisco, CA 94111 - 1 704 Telephone: (415) 391-5400 5 Facsimile: (415) 397-7188 6 Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counter Defendant 7 GOOGLE INC. and Third-Pary Defendants ASK JEEVES, INC. and EARTHLIN, INC. 8 9 UNTED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 11 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN 13 Plaintiff, 12 GOOGLE INC., a Delaware corporation, Case No. C 03-5340-JF 14 v. 17 15 AMERICAN BLIN & W ALLP APER FACTORY, INC., a Delaware corporation 16 d//a decoratetoday.com, Inc., and DOES I- DECLARTION OF MICHAEL H. PAGE IN SUPPORT OF GOOGLE INC.'S OPPOSITION TO AMERICAN BLIND & WALLPAPER, INC.'S (SIC) MOTION TO AMEND AND EXTEND CASE MAAGEMENT ORDER Date: Time: Dept: Judge: 100, inclusive, June 23, 2006 9:00 a.m. Defendants. 18 3 AMERICAN BLIN & W ALLP APER 1 9 FACTORY, INC., a Delaware corporation d//a decoratetoday.com, Inc., Honorable Jeremy Fogel Date Compo Filed: November 26, 2003 20 Trial Date: March 16, 2007 Counter Plaintiff, v. 21 22 23 NETSCAPE COMMCATIONS GOOGLE INC., AMERICA ONLIN, INC., CORPORATION, COMPUSERVE 24 INTERACTIVE SERVICES, INC., ASK JEEVES, INC. and EARTHLIN, INC., 25 26 27 28 Counter Defendant! Third-Partv Defendants. 375306.01 DECLARA TION OF MICHAEL H. PAGE IN SUPPORT OF GOOGLE INC.'S OPPOSITION TO AMERICAN BLIND & W ALLP APER, INC.' S (SIC) MOTION TO AMEND AND EXTEND CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER CASE NO. C 03-5340-JF Dockets.Justia.com Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF Document 117 Filed 06/15/2006 Page 2 of 5 1 I, Michael H. Page, declare as follows: 2 1. I am an attorney licensed to practice in the State of California before this Court. I 3 am a parner at the law firm ofKeker & Van Nest, LLP, counsel for Google Inc. in this action. 4 The information below is stated on my own personal knowledge. I am a competent witness to 5 the facts set forth below, and if called as a witness and placed under oath, I would testify to the 6 truth of those facts. 7 2. On May 18, 2006, I defended the deposition ofPrashant Fuloria. That deposition 8 was scheduled to begin at 9:30 a.m. Mr. Fuloria was delayed in traffc, and arved at 9 approximately 10:15 a.m. He was not, as American Blind & Wallpaper Factory, Inc. ("ABWF") 1 0 claims, two hours late. Nonetheless, I readily agreed both to take as short a lunch break as the 11 court reporter needed and to stay late to complete the deposition. When the cour reporter was 12 unable to stay late, I agreed to produce Mr. Fuloria again at a mutually convenient time to 13 complete his deposition. 14 3. On May 22,2006, David Ramelt, counsel for ABWF, telephoned me. Mr. 15 Ramelt informed me that the ownership of ABWF had recently changed and that its CEO 16 Steve Katzman had resigned. I did not know prior to this conversation that ABWF was 17 considering a management or ownership change, or that one had actually taken place. ABWF 18 had previously informed Google that Mr. Katzman would testify in deposition on June 6, 2006 19 on behalf of ABWF in response to a deposition notice Google had served under Federal Rule of 20 Civil Procedure 30(b)(6). Mr. Rammelt informed me that as a result of Mr. Katzman's 21 resignation, ABWF was canceling the June 6 deposition, and that it was also canceling the 22 deposition of Rose Hagan, one of Google's 30(b)(6) designees. Additionally, Mr. Ramelt 23 stated that he would contact me "in a couple of days" regarding scheduling a new Rule 30(b)( 6) 24 deposition. 25 4. After three days passed since my conversation with Mr. Rammelt without him 26 contacting me again, I sent him an email on May 25, 2006, requesting that he provide me with a 27 scheduling proposaL. I thereafter left Mr. Rammelt two voicemails.Mr. Ramelt did not 28 contact me again until he returned my email on June 1,2006. Mr. Rammelts email did not 1 DECLARATION OF MICHAEL H. PAGE IN SUPPORT OF GOOGLE INC.'SOPPOSITION TO AMERICAN 375306.01 BLIND & WALLPAPER, INC.'S (SIC) MOTION TO AMEND AND EXTEND CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER CASE NO. C 03-5340-JF Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF Document 117 Filed 06/15/2006 Page 3 of 5 1 provide a proposal for when the 30(b)(6) deposition of ABWF would take place or state when 2 ABWF would produce documents that it had previously stated it would produce. I responded to 3 Mr. Rammelt with an email stating that Google would file a motion to compeL. A true and 4 correct copy ofthe above email correspondence between me and Mr. Ramelt is attached hereto 5 as Exhibit A. 6 5. On June 1,2006, Susan Greenspon, who is also counsel for ABWF, telephoned 7 me. During this telephone call Ms. Greenspon stated that ABWF would produce the documents 8 it had previously stated it would produce on June 5, 2006. ABWF did not produce any 9 documents to Google until today. 10 6. On June 7, 2006, Ms. Greenspon called me and requested that Google consent to 11 an extension of the case schedule. After consulting with my client, I advised Ms. Greenspon that 12 Google could not agree to another extension. 13 I declare under penalty ofpeijury under the laws of the United States of America that the 14 foregoing is true and correct. 15 Executed this 15th day of June, 2006, in San Francisco, California. 16 17 18 19 /s/ Michael H. Page MICHAL H. PAGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 375306.01 DECLARATION OF MICHAEL H. PAGE IN SUPPORT OF GOOGLE INC.'S OPPOSITION TO AMERICAN BLIND & WALLPAPER, INC.'S (SIC) MOTION TO AMEND AND EXTEND CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER CASE NO. C 03-5340-JF (EAI) Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF Document 117 Filed 06/15/2006 Page 4 of 5 EXHIBIT A . Message Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF Document 117 Filed 06/15/2006 Page 5 of 5 Doris Joos From: Michael Page Sent: Thursdayi June 011 2006 9:00 AM To: Rammelt David A. Subject: RE: AB&WF David: Thanks for the update. Given the fast-approaching discovery cutoff, I think we will have to file our motion to compel shortly, but let's work on mooting it. Let me know when you have had time to talk to management. Mike From: Rammelt David A. (mailto:DRammelt(QKelleyDrye.comJ Sent: Thursdayi June 011 2006 7: 15 AM -To: Michael Page Subject: RE: AB&WF Mike, Sorry for the delay. I was in Toronto last week, NY through yesterday, and i am now out therest of this week. This much I know -- Steve Katzman resigned and a new CEO is in place. We have an employee who is gathering the requested discovery materials. We have a conference call today to find out when we will be in a position to provide the supplementation you requested. I have not had a meaningful discussions with new management about the direction they wish to take. i think they are swamped right now with the business. i hope to have something more concrete next week. -----Original Message---n From: Michael Page (mailto:MPage(QKVN.comJ Sent: Thursdayi May 251 2006 8: 16 PM To: Rammelt David A. Subject: AB&WF What is status on tHis? You were going to get back to me this week with a scheduling proposal in light of the management change. Pursuant to Treasury Regulations, any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication, unless is not intended and canot be used for the purpose of avoiding tax-related penalties. otherwise stated, please be aware that any other use, printing, copying, disclosure or dissemination of The information contained in this E-mail message is privileged, confidential, and may be protected from disclosure; this communication may be subject to legal restriction or sanction. If you think that you have received this E-mail message in error, please reply to the sender. 6/15/2006

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?