Google Inc. v. American Blind & Wallpaper Factory, Inc.
Filing
188
Attachment 4
Declaration of Ajay S. Krishnan
In Support of Counter-Defendant Google Inc.'s Motion to Compel Counter-Plaintiff ABWF To Satisfy Outstanding Discovery Obligations filed byGoogle Inc., Google Inc.. (Attachments: #
1 #
2 #
3 #
4 #
5 #
6 #
7 #
8 #
9 #
10 #
11 #
12 #
13 #
14 #
15 #
16 #
17 #
18 #
19)(Krishnan, Ajay) (Filed on 9/7/2006)
Google Inc. v. American Blind & Wallpaper Factory, Inc.
Doc. 188 Att. 4
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 188-5
Filed 09/07/2006
Page 1 of 9
. . ...
'. ' '.. . .
. .. .
.
...
'Exhibit.Ð. ........ . .
' ....... ...... ......',..;.... .
. . .' '. :.' ". . . ..' .'.. ". .... '.
. ......'... .
. . . ~ . . '.
.. ., '. ......,.." .. '. ,.. . ....
' ". . .... .:: : . ::....; ': . ,n. . '. .... . . .: . . :" . . '. ". . . .;:, .:. .'.: '.~ .. '.' ~.''.': . :: ..'. :':' .'. :..... ... : ': .. :.. ....... .':...... '. '. :. '.. -"..... "';"... . .. . '. ".. ...... : '. ... ~'. .
. .'. . ..... "........ ....... .';....................... .:'. ...'.'.'..:'.. ...... . ....' ' . -...... .' '. '.' . . .' '. '. . .'. .. .... ",' . .......... .' '. ".. . . .... . . .' .. . . ". .' \.' . .'.
.. .
. . .' .. . ..
.... . .
.... .
f.
-.-
. . .'.. -
.. .. ...
Dockets.Justia.com
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 188-5
Filed 09/07/2006
Page 2 of 9
(. . . ..
~
1.
2
3
Robert N. Phillps (SBN 120970) Ethan B. Andelman(SBN 209101) HOWRY SIMON AROLD & WHITE, LLP 525 Market Street, Suite 3600 San Fracisco, CA 94105
Telephone: '(415) 848-4900
Facsimie: (415) 848-4999
4
5
David A. Ramelt (Admitted Pro HacYice)
6
. Susan J. Greenspon (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) Dawn M. Beery (Admtted Pro Hac Vice)
KELLEY DRYE & WARN LLP
333 West Wacker
7
8
Drve, Suite 2600
Chcago, IL 60606
Telephone: (312) 857-7070
Facsimile:, (312) 857-7095
9
Attorneys for Defendant/Counter-Plaitiff
10 11
12 '
AMERICAN BLIN AN WALLPAPER
FACTORY, INC.
UNTED STATES DISTRCT COURT
13
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN
14
15
GOOGLE INC., a Delaware corporation,
Plaintiff,
v.
CASE NO. C 03-5340-JF (BAI)
16
. 17
AMRICAN BLIN & WALLPAPER
FACTORY, INC.'S RESPONSES TO GOOGLE INC.'S SECOND SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF
lß.
19
:
AMRICAN BLIN AND W ALLP APER' FACTORY, INC., a Delaware corporation'
d//a decoratetoday.com, Inc.; and DOES 1- 100, inclusive, .
DOCUMNTS AN TIGS
,20
Defendants.
. ., 21
. AMRICAN BLIN & W ALLP APER 22 . FACTORY, INC., a Delaware corporation
d//a decoratetoday.com, Inc.
. 23
.24
v.
Counterclaimant,
25
GOGGLE INC.,
26 27 28
. KELLEY DRYE &: WARREN LLP
Counterdefendants.
33WESWACKDRE CHOI/PLATC/209903.1 SU 2600
CIICAGO,n. 60
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
(.
Document 188-5
Filed 09/07/2006
Page 3 of 9
J
1.
NOW COMES Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff, AMRICAN BLIN &
.W ALLP APER FACTORY, lNG, by and through its attorneys, KELLEY DRYE & WARN
LLP ,and in response to Plaintiffs Second Set ofR.equests for Production of
2
3
Documents and
4
5
Things, states as follows:
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.1:
All DOCUMNTS RELATING TO analysis or quantification ofinternet trafc to .
6
7
8.
9
any AMRICAN BLIN DOMA NAM.
RESPONSE: America: Blind objects to this request because it is vague. over
11 . . .
10
broad, and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admissible evidence.
American Blind also objects to this request to the exteiit that it cals for the production of
documents proteCted by the attorney client privilege or the att~mey work product doctrne:
Subject to and without waiving these objections, American Blid states that it has produced aId
12
13
14
..
15 . wil produce responsive~ocuments in it possession regarding the analN'sìs or quantification of
16 internet traffic to any American Blind Domain
Name.
17 18 19
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.2:
All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO strategies and/or methods for increasing.
internet traffc to any AMERICAN
20
21
BLIN WEBSITE.
vague, over
RESPONSE: American Blid objects to ths request because it is
22
23
broad and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of
relevant or admissible evidence.
.Aerican Blid also objects to this request to the. extent that it calls for the production of
documents protected by the attorney client privilege or the
24
25
attorney work product doctre.
Subjecfto and without waiving these objections, American
Blid states that it will produce any
26
responsive
documents in its possession regarding strategies and/or methods for increasing internet
27
28
traffc to any Amercan Blind Website.
33WESTWAciDRJ CHOI/PLATC/209903.\ 5UJ26O
C1ICAGO.:IT 6066
KELLEY DRYE .I . WARREN LLP
- 2-
.. ..',. . ......' ,. , ... ,. . , . .. ,~ .....
..
'.
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
Document 188-5
Filed 09/07/2006
Page 4 of 9
l'
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.3:
All DOCUMNTS RELATING TO strategi~s and/or methods for advertising with
2
3
searcn engies.
RESPONSE: American Blind objects to ths request because it is vague, over
" broad and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admssible evidence. .
American Blind also objects to this request to the extent that it c.alls for the production of
4
5
6
7
8
documents protected by the attorney client privilege or the attorney work product doctre.
. Subject tO.and without waiving these objections, American Blind states that it wil produceany
9 10
responsive documents'in its possession regarding strtegies and/or methods for advertsing with
search engines.
11
12 .
13 All DOCUMNTS RELATING TO AMERICAN BLIN's valuation ofinterhet
14 trffc to
any AMRICAN BLIN WEBSITE, includig but not lited AMRICAN BLIN's
CLICKS.
..
. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO..4:
d 15. valuation of
1.6..
.RESPONSE: American Blind objects to this request because it is overbroad,
. unduly burdensome and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or
admssible evidence. American Blind also objects to
17
18
19
this request to the.extent that it calls for the
production of documents protected by the attorney Client privilege or the attorney work product
doctrne. Subject to aid without waiving these
,.20
21 22
23
objections, American Blind states that it wil '
produce any resonsive documents in its possession regarding valuation of-internet traffc to any
of its websites.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.5:
All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO each ani: every instance where AMERICAN
24 25
BLIN has set its maximum cost-per-click for each DISPUTED 'KEYWORD in GOOGLE's
AdWords prograi. .
26
27
28
KELLEY DRYE &0
RESPo.NSE: American Blind objects to this request because it is over broad,
WARREN LLP
333 WES W ACl DRIE CHOI tPLA TC/209903J SUlE2600
CHICAGO,IL 6006.
-3-
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
4
'.
Document 188-5
Filed 09/07/2006
Page 5 of 9
1
unduly burdensome and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant. or
2
3
admssible evidence. American Blind also objects to this request to the extent that it calls for the
production of documen~ protected by the attorney client pnvilege or the attorney work product.
doctre. Subject to and without waiving these objections, American Blind sttes that it
4
-5
has
. produced and wil produce responsive,.documents in its possession regarding American Blid's
maximum cost-per-click for each disputed keyword in Google's AdWords program.
6 7
8
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.6:
All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO each and every instace where AMRICAN
9
BLIN has set its maximum cost-per-click for each DISPUTED KEYWORD in any'
Internet
10
11
search engie advertising program.
.,
ii
13
14'
RESPONSE: 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. American Blind also objects to this request to the extnt that it calls for the
production of documents protected by the attonieyclient privilege or the attorney work product .
15.
doctre. Subjeèt to and without waiving these objections, American Blind states that it wil
16
produce any responsive documents in its possession regarding Amercan Blind's maximum cost17
per-click for each disputed keyword in any internet search engie
advertising program.
1,8
19
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.7:
All DOCUMNTS RELATING TO each
20
.21
and every instance where AMRICAN .
BLlND has set its maximum daily budget for each of its advertising campaigns in GOOGLE's
AdWords program that include any DISPUTED KEYWORD.
RESPONSE: American Blind
22
;
23 24
25
objects to this request because it is overbroad,
relevant or
unduly burdensome and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of
admissible evidence. Aierican Blind also objects to this request to the extent that it calls for the
production of docûments protected by the attorney client privilege or the attorney work product
26
27 28
KELLEY DRYE & WARREN LLP
33 WESW ACK DRIVE
doctrine. Subject to aId without waiving these objections, American Blid states that it wi!
produce any responsive documents in its possession regarding
American Blid's maximum daily
SUIT 26
CHOI/PLATCI09903.1
- 4-
CIICAGO, lL 60606
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
~
Document 188-5
Filed 09/07/2006
Page 6 of 9
I' budget for each of
its advertsing campaign in Google's AdWords program that include any
2 disputed keyword.
3 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.8:
4
All DOCUMNTS. RELATING TO AMRICAN BLIN's expenditues on
-5
developirg and maintaning each AMERICAN BLIN WEBSITE.
6
RESPONSE: American Blind objects to this request because it is vague, over
7
broad, unduly burdensome and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery .of relevant or
8
admssible evidence. American Blid.also objects to ths
request to the extent that it calls for the
9
production of documents protected by the attorney client priviege or the attorney work product
10
doctrne. Subject to and without waiving these objections, American Blid states that it has
11
produced and wil produce responsive documents in its possession regarding American Blid's
12
expenditues on developing and maintaing its websites.
13
14
15
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTiON NO.9: .
All DOCUMNTS RELATlNG TO AMRICAN BLIN's retu on investment
for search engie advertisiJg, including but not limited to advertsing with GOOGLE.
16
17 18
RESPONSE: American Blind objects to this request because it is .over broad,
unduly burdensome and not reas.onably calculated to lead to the discovery of
relevant or
19
admissible evidence. American Blind also objects to this request to the extent tht it calls for the
production of documents protected by the attorney client privilege or the attorney wòrk product
doctre. Subject to and without waiving these objections, American B1id ,states that it wil
produce any
20
21
22
23
responsive documents in its possession regarding American Blind's retu on
investment for search engine advertising; including but not limited to advertising with Google.
24
25
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10:
. All DocuMNTS RELATING TO AMRlCAN BLIN's use of
the marks
26
"American Blind" or "American Blinds," as STAN-ALONE MAS, in connection with
.,
27
AMRICAN BLIN's sale of
products .or servces.
28
;. 5 -
KELLEY DRYE &:
33 WESW ACK DRE CHOI/PLA TC/209903.1
CIlcAGO, n. 6060
SUITE2610
WARRENLLP
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
.. .. .'
t
Document 188-5
Filed 09/07/2006
Page 7 of 9
1 RESPONSE: American Blid objects to ths request because it is vague, over'
. 2 broad, and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admssible evidence.
3 American Blid alsoobj~cts to this request to the extent that it calls for the production of
4 documents protected by the attorney client privilege or the attorney work product doctre.
5 . Subject to and without waiving these objections, American Blind states that it has prpduced all
. 6 responsive documents to this request.
7 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION
NO. 11:
8
All DOCUNTS RELATING TO AMRICAN BLIN's decisions to use
9
ww.decoratetoday.com as the destination to which most, ifnot all, AMRICAN BLIN
10
WEBSITES refer visitors.
11
RESPONSE: American Blind objects to ths request
because it is vague, over
12
broad, and not reasonably
calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant or admssihIe evidence.
13
Americ~ Blind also objects to this request to the extent that itcalls for the production of .
14.
documeIits protected by the attorney client priviieg~ or the attorney work product doctre.
'15
Subjecfto and without waiving these objections, American Blind states that it has produced and
16
wil produce responsive documents in it possession to this request.
17
l~
19
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 12: .
All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO AMERICAN BLIND's decision to use the.
20
phiase ."American Blinds, Wallpaper & More" to refer to AMERICAN BLIN on the ~over of
,.
.. 21 . some~ ifnot all, of AMRICAN BLIN's customer catalogs.
22 RESPONSE: American Blind
objects to ths request because it is over bro~d,
23 unduly burdensome and not reasonably caicuiat~d to lead to the discovery of relevant or
.. 24 admissible evidence. American Blind also objects to this request to the
extent that it calls for the .
25 production of documents protected by the attorney client privilege or the attorney work product
26 doctre. Subject to and without waiving
these objections, American Blind states that it has
27 pròduced and wil produce responsive' documents in its possession regarding American B1Ids
28 decision to use the phrase "American Blinds, Wallpaper & More" to refer to
American Blid on
. KELLEY DRYE .I WARREN LLP
333 We5W ACKR DRIVE CHOI/PLA TC/209903.! SUIT 2600
~ 6-
CIICGO, IL 6006
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
'I
Document 188-5
Filed 09/07/2006
Page 8 of 9
l' the cover of some, if not all, of American Blind's customer catalogs; see also, American Blind's
2
3
Answer to Google's Second Set of Interrog.atories, Interrogatory No.1.
KELLEY DRYE & W ARRN-LLP
4
5
Dated: June 19,2006
6
7
:.
avid A. Ramelt
Susan J. Greenspon
KELLEY
8
9.
DRYR& WARN LLP
333 West Wacker Dive~ Suite 2600 Chcago, IL 60606 , . .
10
11
RobertN. Phillps
Ethan B. 'Andelnan.
HOWRY SIMON AROLD 8?
WHITE, LLP Market Street, Suite 3600 525 San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415)'848-4900 Facsimile: (415) 84S-4999
12
1:
14.
15 16
Attorneys fur Defendant/Counter~
Plaitiff AMRICAN BLIN
AN W ALLP MER FACTORY~ INC.
17
18
19
20
. 21
.22.
23
24
.25
26
27 28
333Wiw~t=DRivE CHOI/PLATC/Q9903.1
CHICAGO, IT 6006
. KELLEY DRYE &: WARREN LLP
-7 -
Case 5:03-cv-05340-JF
.. ..
'\,- .
Document 188-5
Filed 09/07/2006
Page 9 of 9
,,
1
2
3
PROOF OF SERVICE
I am a citizen ofthe United States and a resident of the State of
ilinois. I am employed in
4
5
Cook County, State ofllois, in the offce of a.member ofthe bar ofthis Cour, at whose
direction the service was made. I am over the agy of eighteen years, and not a pary to the within action, My business address is 333 W. Wacker Drive, Suite 2600, Chicago,. IL 60606. On the date set fort beiow, I served the document(s) described below in the
maner described below:
6 7
8
AMRICAN BLIND AND W ALLP APER FACTORY, INC.'S RESPONSES TO . PLAITIFF GOOGLE INC.'S SECOND SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMfNTS AN TmNGS
9
10
11 '
VI FACSIMLE and U.S. MAL .
Michael H. Page Mark A. Lemley .
Klaus H. Ham
Ajay S~ Krshnan
12
13
Keker & Van Nest, LLP
71 0 Sansome Street
San Francisco, CA 941.1
14
xx (BY FACSIMILE) I am
personally and readily fa:ri1arwiththe business practice'
.15
of
Kelley Dre & Waren, LLP tor collection and processing of document(s) to be
16
17
transmitted by facsimile and I caused such document(s) on ths date to be transmtted by
18
19
facsirile to the offices of addressee(s) at the numbers listed below. (BY FEDERA EXPRESS) I am personally and readily famiJiar with the business of correspondence practice ofKelleyDrye & Waren,LLP for coUection and processing' for overnight delivery, and I caused such document(s) descrbed herein to be deposited for delivery to a facility regularly maitaed by Federal Express for overnght delivei.Y. consignng the document(s) to an authorized courer (BY MESSENGER SERVICE) by
. and/or process server for hand delivery on this date. .
20
21
XX (BY U.S. MAIL) I am personally and readily familiar with the business practice of .
Kelley Drye &, W aren,LLP for collection and processing of correspondence for mailig. .
with the United States
22
..
23
24
Carolie C. Plater
2S
26 27
28
~~..'.'
Executéd on June 19,2006, at Chicago,
Postal SerVce, and I caused suchenvelope(s) with postage.thereon fully prepaid to be placed in the United States Postal Servce at Chicago, ilinois.
Illiois.
. KELLEY DRYE &, WARREN LLP DRIE CHOI/PLATCI209903.1 333 WES WACK
SUl2600
-8-
C:aICA~, n. 6006
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?