Shloss v. Sweeney et al

Filing 74

Declaration of David S. Olson in Support of 73 MOTION for Attorney Fees and Costs filed byCarol Loeb Shloss. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A# 2 Exhibit B# 3 Exhibit C# 4 Exhibit D# 5 Exhibit E# 6 Exhibit F# 7 Exhibit G# 8 Exhibit H# 9 Exhibit J# 10 Exhibit K# 11 Exhibit L# 12 Exhibit M# 13 Exhibit N# 14 Exhibit O# 15 Exhibit P# 16 Exhibit Q# 17 Exhibit R# 18 Exhibit S# 19 Exhibit T# 20 Exhibit U)(Related document(s) 73 ) (Olson, David) (Filed on 4/10/2007)

Shloss v. Sweeney et al

Doc. 74 Att. 18

Case 5:06-cv-03718-JW

Document 74-19

Filed 04/10/2007

Page 1 of 9

EXHIBIT S

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 5:06-cv-03718-JW

Document 74-19

Filed 04/10/2007

Page 2 of 9

7

CAROL LOEB SHLOSS,

) )

8 JW 9 2007 10 versus

Plaintiff,

) ) ) ) January 31, No. C 06-03718

SEAN SWEENEY, et al., Defendant.

) )

11

______________________________)

12

13

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE HONORABLE JAMES WARE

14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

15

16

A-P-P-E-A-R-A-N-C-E-S:

17 Center

For the Plaintiff:

Stanford Law School for Internet and Society

18

By: ANTHONY T. FALZONE DAVID S. OLSON

Case 5:06-cv-03718-JW

Document 74-19

Filed 04/10/2007

Page 3 of 9

19

Crown Quadrangle 559 Nathan Abbott Way

20

Stanford, CA 94305-8610

21

For the Defendants:

Jones Day By: MARIA K. NELSON

22

ANNA E. RAIMER 555 South Flower Street

23

5th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071

24 Court Reporter: 25 Georgina Galvan Colin License No. 10723

1

GEORGINA GALVAN COLIN, CSR 10723

1 2007

San Jose, California

January 31,

2

P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S

Case 5:06-cv-03718-JW

Document 74-19

Filed 04/10/2007

Page 4 of 9

Carol

3

THE CLERK:

Calling case 06-03718,

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 for 14 associate 15 me 16 17 18 19 20 21

Loeb Shloss versus Sean Sweeney, et al, on for defendant's motion to dismiss. each side. Counsel, please step forward and state your appearances. MR. FALZONE: Professor Carol Shloss. MR. OLSON: Carol Shloss. MS. NELSON: Your Honor, Maria Nelson With me is my David Olson for Professor Anthony Falzone for Fifteen minutes

the estate of James Joyce.

Anna Raimer, and the defendant Sean Sweeney. MR. FALZONE: Your Honor, I have with

the plaintiff, Professor Carol Shloss. THE COURT: all; welcome. Very well, this is your motion, Ms. Nelson, to dismiss. Good morning. Good morning

Case 5:06-cv-03718-JW

Document 74-19

Filed 04/10/2007

Page 5 of 9

22 Honor. 23 you 24 25 2

MS. NELSON: THE COURT:

That is correct, your Do you want to, you can

submit it on the papers or make an argument if wish.

GEORGINA GALVAN COLIN, CSR 10723

1 2 3 Stephen 4 5 6 7 8 on 9 points.

MS. NELSON: argument, your Honor.

I'm happy to make an

First, I would like to clarify a few The Estate, despite the fact that

Joyce is not a party to the Estate, the Estate certainly takes this proceeding very seriously. And Mr. Joyce is not ignoring the proceeding. He does consider these proceedings to be binding on the Estate. The Estate is not covenanted to sue

10 website 11 12 13

the materials that Ms. Shloss added to the after the initial complaint was filed. good reasons for that. There are

There was considerable

material that was added months after the

Case 5:06-cv-03718-JW

Document 74-19

Filed 04/10/2007

Page 6 of 9

14 15 16 from 17 nor 18 present 19 20 the 21 22 23 decision. 24 25 they 3

proceedings were started, but that does not mean that there is a complaint on those materials waiting in the wings either from the Estate or Stephen Joyce. There is not. Neither the Estate its trustees, either one of them, have any intention of suing Ms. Shloss over those 2006 materials. The Estate did covenant not to sue on original materials that were presented to it in 2005. That was actually a very practical

That doesn't mean that the Estate considers those materials to be a fair use, it just means that

GEORGINA GALVAN COLIN, CSR 10723

1 As 2 3 4 making

don't consider them to be worth fighting over. the declaration of Anna Raimer makes very clear, the Estate's position is that the materials that Shloss added to the website in 2005 are only

Case 5:06-cv-03718-JW

Document 74-19

Filed 04/10/2007

Page 7 of 9

the

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

a very incremental difference over what was in book. THE COURT: Now, you started in the

middle and I appreciate with all this paper it's fair to start in the middle, but let me back up. MS. NELSON: THE COURT: Okay. Because I understand the

thrust of your argument, the Court should dismiss because there is no case or controversy because Estate or anyone who would speak on behalf of the Estate is willing to release and give a covenant not to sue to the plaintiff for the material she plans to publish, is that a correct MS. NELSON: THE COURT: MS. NELSON: Only partially. All right. At this point, your Honor,

the 14 15 16 which 17 statement? 18 19 20 21 22 23 that 24 25 make? MS. NELSON: The difference that that

backing up, there was an original complaint and then later on an amended complaint. THE COURT: So what difference does

Case 5:06-cv-03718-JW

Document 74-19

Filed 04/10/2007

Page 8 of 9

20 21 22 23 24 25 32 GEORGINA GALVAN COLIN, CSR 10723

1 2 3 4 Reporter 5 6 7 full, 8 9 Case that 10 11

CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER

I, Georgina Galvan Colin, Court for the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, 280 South First Street, San Jose, California, do hereby certify: That the foregoing transcript is a true and correct transcript of the proceeding had in Carol Loeb Shloss vs Sean Sweeney, et al., Number C-06-03718 JW, dated January 31, 2007,

Case 5:06-cv-03718-JW

Document 74-19

Filed 04/10/2007

Page 9 of 9

12 my by 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 33

I reported the same in stenotype to the best of ability, and thereafter had the same transcribed computer-aided transcription as herein appears.

Dated:

(Certified hard copy to follow) ____________________________ GEORGINA GALVAN COLIN, CSR License Number 10723

GEORGINA GALVAN COLIN, CSR 10723 !SIG:45e4964c82921890649246!