Digital Envoy Inc., v. Google Inc.,

Filing 66

Digital Envoy Inc., v. Google Inc.,

Doc. 66

Case 5:04-cv-01497-RS

Document 66

Filed 01/20/2005

Page 1 of 2

1 P. CRAIG CARDON, Cal. Bar No. 168646

BRIAN R. BLACKMAN, Cal. Bar No. 196996 2 KENDALL M. BURTON, Cal. Bar No. 228720 SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP 3 Four Embarcadero Center, 17th Floor San Francisco, California 94111-4106 4 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: 415-434-3947

5 6 TIMOTHY H. KRATZ (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
LUKE ANDERSON (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) 7 MCGUIRE WOODS, L.L.P 1170 Peachtree Street, N.E., Suite 2100 8 Atlanta, Georgia 30309 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: 404.443.5751

10 Attorneys for DIGITAL ENVOY, INC. 11 12 13 14 DIGITAL ENVOY, INC., 15 16
v. Plaintiff/Counterdefendant, DECLARATION OF TIMOTHY H. KRATZ IN OPPOSITION TO GOOGLE, INC.'S MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME Defendant/Counterclaimant. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION Case No. C 04 01497 RS

17 GOOGLE, INC., 18 19 20 21
I, Timothy H. Kratz, declare as follows: 1. I am an attorney of law duly licensed to practice in the State of Georgia and

22 admitted to practice before this court pro hac vice. I am a partner at the firm McGuireWoods LLP 23 and attorney for the Plaintiff/Counterdefendant Digital Envoy, Inc. ("Digital Envoy"). I have 24 personal knowledge of all facts set forth herein. 25
2. The opposed the briefing schedule set forth in Google, Inc.'s ("Google") Motion

26 for Protective Order would prejudice Digital Envoy because it does not afford counsel for Digital 27 Envoy sufficient time to draft an adequate response brief. 28
W02-SF:5BB\61441617.1

-1Dockets.Justia.com

Case 5:04-cv-01497-RS

Document 66

Filed 01/20/2005

Page 2 of 2

1

3.

If Digital Envoy is allowed to file its response brief two days later, on January 24,

2 2005, counsel for Digital Envoy will have sufficient time to draft an adequate response brief. 3
4. As counsel for Digital Envoy, I stipulated to the hearing date for Google's Motion

4 for Protective Order to be on January 26, 2005. This stipulation was made in a good faith effort to 5 allow Google the opportunity to have its motion heard before responses to Digital Envoy's non6 party subpoenas become due. 7
5. My refusal to stipulate to Google's briefing schedule was done solely to protect the

8 rights of my client and to ensure Digital Envoy's legal team was given sufficient time to draft a 9 response brief. 10
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the

11 foregoing is true and correct. Executed on January 20, 2005, at Atlanta, Georgia. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
W02-SF:5BB\61441617.1

/s/ Timothy H. Kratz_____ Timothy H. Kratz

-2-