Kinderstart.Com, LLC v. Google, Inc.

Filing 20

Kinderstart.Com, LLC v. Google, Inc.

Doc. 20 Att. 1

Case 5:06-cv-02057-JF

Document 20-2

Filed 06/01/2006

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Gregory J. Yu (State Bar No. 133955) GLOBAL LAW GROUP 2015 Pioneer Court, Suite P-1 San Mateo, CA 94403 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] E-mail: glgroup [at] inreach [dot] com Attorney for Plaintiffs and Proposed Class and Subclasses

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION Case No. C 06-2057 JF KINDERSTART.COM LLC, a California limited liability company, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, DECLARATION OF GREGORY J. YU IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S Plaintiffs, OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATIVE v. RELIEF UNDER LOCAL RULE 7-11 GOOGLE, INC., a Delaware corporation, Defendant.

I, GREGORY J. YU, HEREBY DECLARE AS FOLLOWS: 1. My name is Gregory J. Yu, and I am legal counsel to plaintiff KinderStart.com

LLC ("KSC") in the above action and am authorized by my client to make this declaration in support of plaintiff's opposition to defendant's Miscellaneous Administrative Request on file herein ("Defendant's Request"). 2. On May 2, 2006, I had a telephone conversation with counsel to Defendant,

David H. Kramer, about this case. Mr. Kramer advised me that Defendants would be noticing the court for two motions, its anti-SLAPP motion and its Rule 12(b) motion to dismiss, to be heard on June 30, 2006. Plaintiff's acknowledged this and agreed with Defendant to this date. I then advised Mr. Kramer that Plaintiff would be filing a motion for a preliminary injunction
DECLARATION OF GREGORY J. YU IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATIVE REQUEST UNDER LOCAL RULE 7-11 -1-

Case No. C 06-2057 JF
Dockets.Justia.com

Case 5:06-cv-02057-JF

Document 20-2

Filed 06/01/2006

Page 2 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

("Injunction Motion") and wanted have it heard earlier than Friday, June 30, perhaps either of two Fridays, June 16 or 23. Since neither Mr. Kramer nor his partner Jonathan Jacobsen was available for those two dates, Mr. Kramer declined that request. However, he indicated that having Defendants' dual motions and Plaintiff's one motion heard on the same day, June 30, would be amenable to him. (This was confirmed in an e-mail from Mr. Kramer on May 2, 2006.) Mr. Kramer further stated that if the timing of all motions were identical, the respective briefing schedules for both sides would be mirrored to allow better management of the arguments and motions for the parties and the Court. 3. On May 26, 2006, I telephoned Mr. Kramer to advise him that Plaintiff KSC

would be noticing the Injunction Motion for June 30, 2006. Mr. Kramer did not object to this hearing date or to Plaintiff's filing or noticing of such motion. 4. On or prior to May 31, 2006, never did Mr. Kramer suggest to me by phone, e-

mail or VoiceMail that the Injunction Motion be postponed until after the hearing of Defendant's own two motions. 5. Never have I as Plaintiff's counsel asked Defendant or the Court for a delay,

postponement or separation of Defendant's two pending motions or the associated briefing due dates. I DECLARE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY, that the above is based on my personal knowledge. Executed on this 1st day of June, 2006 in San Mateo, California. By: /s/ Gregory J. Yu GREGORY J. YU .

DECLARATION OF GREGORY J. YU IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATIVE REQUEST UNDER LOCAL RULE 7-11 -2-

Case No. C 06-2057 JF