Kinderstart.Com, LLC v. Google, Inc.

Filing 72

Case 5:06-cv-02057-JF

Document 72

Filed 11/22/2006

Page 1 of 3

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

DAVID H. KRAMER, State Bar No. 168452 COLLEEN BAL, State Bar No. 167637 LISA A. DAVIS, State Bar No. 179854 BART E. VOLKMER, State Bar No. 223732 WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI Professional Corporation 650 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] JONATHAN M. JACOBSON, N.Y. State Bar No. 1350495 WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI Professional Corporation 12 East 49th Street, 30th Floor New York, NY 10017-8203 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendant Google Inc. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

KINDERSTART.COM, LLC, a California limited liability company, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. GOOGLE INC., a Delaware corporation, Defendant.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

CASE NO.: C 06-2057 JF (RS) DECLARATION OF DAVID H. KRAMER IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST KINDERSTART.COM AND GREGORY J. YU PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. RULE 11 Before: Date: Time: Courtroom: Hon. Jeremy Fogel December 8, 2006 9:00 a.m. 3, 5th Floor

KRAMER DECL. ISO GOOGLE'S RULE 11 MOTION Case No. 06-2057 JF (RS)

2997997_1.DOC

Case 5:06-cv-02057-JF

Document 72

Filed 11/22/2006

Page 2 of 3

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

I, David H. Kramer, declare as follows: 1. I am a partner with Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati ("WSGR") and counsel of

record for Defendant Google Inc. ("Google") in this action. The following facts are true of my personal knowledge and if called and sworn as a witness, I could and would testify competently to them. 2. Google hand-served, but did not file, its Motion for Sanctions in this matter (the

"Motion"), along with the supporting Declaration of Matt Cutts, on KinderStart's counsel, Gregory Yu, on September 28, 2006. KinderStart did not take any remedial steps concerning the conduct described in the Motion. Accordingly, on October 20, 2006, 22 days after the Motion was served, Google filed the Motion with the Court. 3. On July 14, 2006, the Court issued an Order in this matter dismissing

KinderStart's First Amended Complaint, but granting KinderStart leave to amend. On July 20, 2006, I read a news article online which contained remarks attributed to KinderStart's counsel, Mr. Yu, to the effect that KinderStart intended to file a second amended complaint. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of that article, which may be found online at: http://news.com.com/Judge+dismisses+suit+over+Google+ranking/2100-1030_3-6094132.html 4. After I read the article, I wrote to Mr. Yu to express Google's concern over

allegations that KinderStart might include in its Second Amended Complaint. A true and correct copy of my email to Mr. Yu is attached hereto as Exhibit B. 5. In its opposition to this motion, KinderStart suggests that the Court reschedule the

hearing on Google's Rule 11 motion to January 19, 2007 so that it can be heard with KinderStart's own sanctions motion. When I saw that suggestion, I called Mr. Yu, and offered to stipulate to continue the hearing on this motion. Mr. Yu refused, claiming KinderStart did not "want to go on record" as approving a continuance. // // // //
KRAMER DECL. ISO GOOGLE'S RULE 11 MOTION Case No. 06-2057 JF (RS)

-1-

2997997_1.DOC

Case 5:06-cv-02057-JF

Document 72

Filed 11/22/2006

Page 3 of 3

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

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Executed on November 22, 2006 at Palo Alto, California By: /s/ David H. Kramer David H. Kramer

KRAMER DECL. ISO GOOGLE'S RULE 11 MOTION Case No. 06-2057 JF (RS)

-2-

2997997_1.DOC