Kinderstart.Com, LLC v. Google, Inc.

Filing 66

Kinderstart.Com, LLC v. Google, Inc.

Doc. 66

Case 5:06-cv-02057-JF

Document 66

Filed 10/26/2006

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, SUPPLEMENTAL DOCUMENT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' Plaintiffs, OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS UNDER FED. R. v. CIV. P. 12(b)(6) GOOGLE, INC., a Delaware corporation, Defendant. Judge: Hon. Jeremy Fogel Date: October 27, 2006 Time: 1:30 p.m. Courtroom: 5th Floor, Room 3

Plaintiff KinderStart.com LLC ("KinderStart"), by and through its attorney, hereby requests the Court to consider the attached Declaration of Daniel D. Savage, attached hereto as Exhibit 1. The undersigned counsel represents that the substance of the attached declaration was received only yesterday, October 26, 2006. Counsel to Google, Inc. was advised by telephone today that plaintiffs would be filing a supplemental declaration but did not indicate whether it would accept its filing with the Court. This request by KinderStart is to enable the Court to further assess one or more of the following: (1) the merits of the pending motion to dismiss this action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6); (2) the availability and eligibility of one or more class representatives;

REQUEST RE SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS UNDER RULE 12(b)(6)

-1-

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

Case 5:06-cv-02057-JF

Document 66

Filed 10/26/2006

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

and (3) the possibility of allowing, if deemed suitable or necessary in the Court's discretion, a further amendment1 of the complaint. Dated: October 19, 2006 GLOBAL LAW GROUP

By:

___/s/ Gregory J. Yu__________________ Gregory J. Yu, Esq. Attorney for Plaintiff KinderStart.com LLC and for the proposed Class and Subclasses

In the Ninth Circuit, courts decide on further leaves to amend a pleading using factors such as "the presence or absence of undue delay, bad faith, dilatory motive, repeated failure to cure deficiencies by previous amendments, undue prejudice to the opposing party and futility of the proposed amendment." Moore v. Kayport Package Express, 885 F.2d 531, 538 (9th Cir. 1989).
REQUEST RE SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS UNDER RULE 12(b)(6)

1

-2-

Case No. C 06-2057 JF