Feldman v. Google, Inc.

Filing 15

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER filed by Lawrence Feldman. (Silbert, David) (Filed on 8/10/2007)

Download PDF
Feldman v. Google, Inc. Doc. 15 Case 5:07-cv-02411-RMW Document 15 Filed 08/10/2007 Page 1 of 5 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 400821.01 LAWRENCE E. FELDMAN & ASSOCIATES LAWRENCE E. FELDMAN 432 Tulpehocken Avenue Elkins Park, PA 19027 (215) 885-3302 Attorneys for Plaintiff LAWRENCE E. FELDMAN & ASSOCIATES KEKER & VAN NEST, LLP DARALYN J. DURIE - #169825 DAVID J. SILBERT - #173128 KEVIN T. REED - #240799 710 Sansome Street San Francisco, CA 94111-1704 Telephone: (415) 391-5400 Facsimile: (415) 397-7188 Attorneys for Defendant GOOGLE, INC. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION LAWRENCE E. FELDMAN d/b/a Case No. C 07 02411 RMW LAWRENCE E. FELDMAN AND ASSOCIATES, JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER Plaintiff, Date: August 17, 2007 v. Time: 10:30 a.m. Judge: Hon. Ronald M. Whyte GOOGLE, INC., Defendant. JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 400864.01 CASE NO. C 07 02411 RMW Dockets.Justia.com Case 5:07-cv-02411-RMW Document 15 Filed 08/10/2007 Page 2 of 5 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 400821.01 Plaintiff Lawrence E. Feldman d/b/a Lawrence E. Feldman & Associates ("Feldman") and defendant Google, Inc. ("Google") submit this Case Management Statement and Proposed Order and request that the Court to adopt it as its Case Management Order in this case. The parties have met and conferred over this statement and have agreed to jointly file this statement I. DESCRIPTION OF THE CASE Feldman brings this action alleging that Google overcharged him for pay-per-click advertising in its AdWords advertising program by charging him for "fraudulent clicks." Feldman purports to have opted out of the Arkansas class-action click settlement, with which this Court is familiar. Google is investigating Feldman's claim that he opted out of the settlement. Pending completion of its investigation, Google disputes that claim. Feldman originally filed this action in state court in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Google removed to federal court based on diversity of citizenship, then moved to dismiss or transfer the case to this Court based on the forum-selection clause in the AdWords agreement. On March 29 2007, the district court in Philadelphia granted Google's motion to transfer, ruling that the forum-selection clause in the contract is valid and enforceable. Feldman asserts causes of action for (1) breach of implied contract, (2) breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, (3) fraudulent inducement, (4) negligence, (5) unjust enrichment, and (6) unfair business practices. The parties are not yet in a position to identify all of the principal factual and legal issues in dispute. But it is clear that the parties will dispute at least the following factual and legal issues: (1) whether Feldman's claims are barred by the Arkansas class-action settlement; (2) whether Google charged Feldman for "fraudulent clicks"; and (3) whether Google's alleged charging of Feldman for "fraudulent clicks" constitutes a breach of contract or was otherwise unlawful. II. ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION The parties have filed a Stipulation and Proposed Order selecting mediation as their 1 JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 400864.01 CASE NO. C 07 02411 RMW Case 5:07-cv-02411-RMW Document 15 Filed 08/10/2007 Page 3 of 5 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 preferred ADR process. III. DISCLOSURES The parties have not made the disclosures required by Rule 26, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure. The parties have met and conferred on the appropriate schedule for these disclosures, and agreed to make their disclosures within thirty days of the case management conference. IV. DISCOVERY The parties likely intend to pursue all discovery methods available under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, including depositions, interrogatories, requests for admission, and requests for production. The parties request the following discovery schedule: 10/8/07 5/9/08 5/16/08 5/30/08 6/6/08 6/20/08 6/27/08 8/15/08 Deadline for plaintiff to amend complaint; Non-expert discovery cut-off; Opening expert reports Opposition expert reports Reply expert reports Expert discovery cut-off; Last day to file dispositive motions; File (or lodge) and serve trial brief; motions in limine; deposition and discovery responses offered as evidence; proposed voir dire questions; proposed jury instructions; proposed form of verdict; joint pretrial statement File (or lodge) and serve oppositions to motions in limine; objections to use of discovery responses; counter-designations; objections to voir dire, verdict forms, or authenticity or admissibility of trial exhibits; Pretrial conference 8/22/08 8/29/08 2 400821.01 JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 400864.01 CASE NO. C 07 02411 RMW Case 5:07-cv-02411-RMW Document 15 Filed 08/10/2007 Page 4 of 5 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 Dated: August 10, 2007 Dated: August 10, 2007 V. TRIAL SCHEDULE The parties request that the Court set a trial on September 8, 2008, or thereafter at the Court's convenience. The parties estimate that the trial will take one week. KEKER & VAN NEST, LLP By: /s/David J. Silbert___________________ DAVID J. SILBERT Attorneys for Defendant GOOGLE, INC. LAWRENCE E. FELDMAN & ASSOCIATES By: /s/Lawrence E. Feldman______________ LAWRENCE E. FELDMAN & ASSOCIATES Attorneys for Plaintiff LAWRENCE E. FELDMAN 3 400821.01 JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 400864.01 CASE NO. C 07 02411 RMW Case 5:07-cv-02411-RMW Document 15 Filed 08/10/2007 Page 5 of 5 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 Dated: CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER The Case Management Statement and Proposed Order is hereby adopted by the Court as the Case Management Order for the case and the parties are ordered to comply with this Order. By: _______________________________________ THE HONORABLE RONALD M. WHYTE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 4 400821.01 JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 400864.01 CASE NO. C 07 02411 RMW

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?