eBay Inc. v. Digital Point Solutions, Inc. et al

Filing 129

Declaration of Colleen M. Kennedy in Support of 128 MOTION to Compel eBay's Notice of Motion and Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Production, Interrogatories and Requests for Admission from Digital Point Solutions, Inc. and Shawn Hogan; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support filed byeBay Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit 7, # 8 Exhibit 8, # 9 Exhibit 9, # 10 Exhibit 10, # 11 Exhibit 11, # 12 Exhibit 12, # 13 Exhibit 13, # 14 Exhibit 14, # 15 Exhibit 15, # 16 Exhibit 16, # 17 Exhibit 17, # 18 Exhibit 18)(Related document(s) 128 ) (Kennedy, Colleen) (Filed on 9/29/2009)

eBay Inc. v. Digital Point Solutions, Inc. et al

Doc. 129 Att. 4

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page1 of 24

EXHIBIT 5

Dockets.Justia.com

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page2 of 24

Seyamack Kouretchian (State Bar No. 171741) [e-mail]~n Ross Campbell (State Bar No. 234827) Rcampbell@Coast LawGroup.com COAST LAW GROUP, LLP ' 169 Saxony Road, Suite 204 Encinitas, California 92024 Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone] Attorneys for Defendants, SHAWN HOGAN and DIGITAL POINT SOLUTIONS, INC.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

EBAY, INC., Plaintiff,
v.

)

Case No. CV 08-04052 JF PVT DEFENDANT SHAWN HOGAN'S RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION (SET ONE)

1
) ,) ) )

DIGITAL POINT SOLUTIONS, INC., SHAWN HOGAN, KI~SSLERS FLYING CIRCUS, THLTNDERWOOD HOLDINGS, INC., TODD DUNNING, DUNNING ENTERPRISE, INC., B U N DUNNING, BRIANI)UNNING.COM, and Does 1-20, Defendants.

1
)

1 1

PROPOUNDING PARTY: Plaintiff EBAY, INC. WSPONDING PARTY: SET NUMBER: Defendant SHAWN HOGAN One

Defendant SHAWN HOGAN ("Defendant") hereby responds to the Plaintiff EBAY, MG.'s ("Plaintiffs") First Set of Requests for Production, as follows:

Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to lai in tiff's Requests For Production, Set One

Case No. CV 08-04052 JF
1

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page3 of 24

I. P I U I L I ~ STATEiMElVT ~Y
The Federal Bureau of Investigation has seized documents and materials potentially related to the present action. As of the date of these responses, the FBI has not returned all of the seized materials to Defendant, some of which may be responsive to Plaintiff's requests hereunder. Further, FBI Special Agent Melanie Adams and Assistant United States Attorney Kyle F. Walding inform that Defendant is the subject of a grand jury investigation and that it is anticipated that criminaI charges will be filed. Because PlaintiE has attempted to assert various claims under state and federal criminal statutes as well as common law h u d , and seeks to conduct discovery with respect to the same via the subject requests for production, Defendant hereby asserts his privilege against self-incrimination (as specifically set forth below) under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution (United States v. BuZsys (1998) 524 U.S. 666,672; Lefkowitz v. T d e y (1973) 414 U.S. 70,77); the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501; the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant fkrther objects because conducting discovery is premature and inappropriate at this time. Upon the transfer of this action to the appropriate forum, Defendant intends to seek a stay of this action (andor any other appropriate relit$), including a stay of all discovery in this matter, pending the resolution of any potential criminal proceedings and/or until the statute of limitations on any such criminal proceedings has run. To the extent Defendant determines that there is no longer a threat of criminal prosecution, Defendant emresslv reserves the right to withdraw his assertion of the privilege against self-incrimination. to suu~lement resnonses accordinglv (in whole or in Dart), and to obiect to his the use or disclosure of the following responses. including the assertion of the privilege aaainst self incrimination. for anv purpose whatsoever. Defendant further objects to the subject discovery requests in that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plainties First Amended Complaint was granted with leave to amend as to Plaintiffs claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and other fraud-based claims, and discovery is therefore premature. Williams v. W M YTechnologies, Inc., 112 F.3d 175, 178 (5th Cir. 1997) (in fraud i; cases, the requisite elements must be adequately laid out "before access to the discovery process is granted." (emphasis in original)). /.I./
Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to Plaintiff's Requests For Production, Set One
Case No. CV 08-04052 JF
2

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page4 of 24

Defendant further objects to the definitions set forth in Plaintiff's requests; these objections include, but are not limited to, the following: "Hogan," "Hogan Entities," "Commission Junction," and "eBay7'are compound, vague and ambiguous. The definition of "eBay"is fiather unduly burdensome and oppressive in that the phrases "eBay's internationally operated websites," and "any and all divisions, subdivisions, departments or subsidiaries of eBay" constitute information within Plaintiff's control andor are unknown to Defendant. The definition of "'Commission Junction" is unduly burdensome and oppressive in that the phrase "all parent organizations, divisions, subdivisions, dep subsidiaries" reference information that is outside Defendant's control andor is unknown to Defendant. Defendant incorporates each of the foregoing objections in Defendant's responses below.

II. RESPONSES
REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1
All documents relating to eBay, including all agreements, terms of service and terms and conditions. . Resnonse to Reauest for Production No. 1: Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incriminationunder the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501;the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant W e r objects because this request may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which are privileged from disclosure by the attorney-client relationship andor the attorney work broduct doctrine. Defendant further objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietary/ confidential information, trade secrets, andfor violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant hrther objects because this request seeks the production of documents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant firther objects because this request is vague and ambiguous. Defendant krther objects because this request is overbroad, unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in full.
I././
Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to Plaintiffs Requests For Production, Set One Case No. CV 08-04052 JF
3

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page5 of 24

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2
All documents relating to, or Comtmications with, eBay or any c m n t or former employee of eBay. Response to Reauest for Production No. 2: Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501; the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940, Defendant k t h e r objects because this request may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which are privileged &om disclosure by the attorney-client relationship and/or the attorney work product doctrine. Defendant M e r objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietary/ confidential idomation, trade secrets, and/or violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant further objects because this request seeks the production of documents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects because this request is vague and ambiguous. Defendant further objects because this request is overbroad, unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by refaence in full.

REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3
A11 documents relating to payment of commissions or other revenue obtained by Hogan or Hogan

Entities through participation in, interaction with or manipulation of eBay's Affiliate Marketing Program. Response to Request for Production No. 3: Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501; the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant further objects because this request may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which are privileged fiom disclosure by the attorney-client
I

relationship and/or the attorney work product doctrine.' Defendant Eurther objects because this demand
Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to PIaintiff s Requests For Production, Set One Case No. CV 0844052 J F
4

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page6 of 24

may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietary/ confidential information, trade secrets, andlor violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant &her objects because this request is vague and ambiguous. Defendant further objects because this request is compound, overbroad, unduly burdensome and oppressive. Defendant W e r objects because this request is argumentative with respect to its use of the term "manipulation." Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in full.

All documents relating to eBay's M i a t e Marketing Program, including, but not limited to, all methods and technologies used by Hogan or Hogan Entities to obtain revenue from, manipulate or otherwise interact with eBay's Affiliate Marketing Program, including, but not limited to, all s o h ; source code, Javascript, and HTML code. Response to Request for Production No. 4: Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to.the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501; the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence
Ir

Code section 940. Defendant further objects because this request may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which are privileged fiorn disclosure by the attorney-client relationship and/or the attorney work product doctrine. Defendant further objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietary1 confidential infomation, trade secrets, and/or violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant further objects because this request is vague and ambiguous. Defendant further objects because this request is compound, overbroad, unduly burdensome and oppressive. Defendant further objects because this request is argumentative with respect to its use of the term "manipulate." Further, Defendant incorporates the above PreIirninary Statement herein by reference in full.

REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 5
All documents relating to advertisements for eBay used, or purported to be used, on any website or ad network that directed or referred Users to eBay as part of eBay's Afiliate Marketing Program, 1.1.1
Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to Plaintiff's Requests For Production, Set One Case No. CV 08-04052 SF
5

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page7 of 24

Res~onse Reauest for Production No. 5: to Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501; the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and Calgornia Evidence Code section 940. Defendant further objects because this request may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which'are privileged fiom disclosure by the attorney-client
,

relationship andlor the attorney workproduct doctrine. Defendant further objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietqt' confidential Momation, trade secrets, andlor violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant further objects because this request is overbroad, not reasonably particularized, and seeks the production of documents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant W e r objects because this request is vague and ambiguous. Defendant further objects because this request is unduly burdensome and oppressive.

Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in full.

FtEOUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 6
All documents reflecting the number of Users who allegedly clicked on an advertisement for e%ayused, or purported to be used, by Hogan or Hogan Entities to direct or refer Users to e%ayas part of eBay's Affiliate Marketing Program. Resuonse to Request for Production No. 6: Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 50 1;the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defmdant further objects because this request may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which are privileged fiom disclosure by the attorney-client relationship and/or the attorney work product doctrine. Defendant further objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietary/ confidential information, trade secrets, and/or violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant further objects because this request is vague and ambiguous. Defendant further objects because this request is
Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to Plaintiffs Requests For Production, Set One

Case No. CV 08-04052 JF
6

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page8 of 24

,verbroad, unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary statement herein by reference in fufl.

REOUEST FOR PRODUmION NO. 7
All documents relating to methods or techniques intended to, or causing, a User's browser to load my eBay webpage, webpage content or data therefiorn. Response to Request for Production No. 7: Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege %gainst self-incrimimtion under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501; the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant further objects because this request may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which are privileged from disclosure by the attorney-client relationship andlor the attorney work product doctrine. Defendant further objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietary1 zonfidential inGormation andlor trade secrets. Defendant further objects because this request is vague md ambiguous. Defendant further objects because this request is overbroad, not reasonably particularized, and unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in fufl.

REOUEST FOR PROTlUCmON NO. 8
All documents sufficient to identify all advertising networks, advertising syndication services or websites used or purportedly used by Hogan or Hogan Entities to advertise or promote eBay or to interact in any way with eI3ay or eBayls Afliliate Marketing Programs. Resuonse to Request for Production No. 8: Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501;the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant further objects because this request may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which are privileged fiom disclosure by the attorney-client relationship andlor the attorney work product doctrine. Defendant further objects because this demand
Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to Plaintiffs Requests For Production, Set One Case No. CV 08-04052 JF
7

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page9 of 24

may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietary1 zonfidential information, trade secrets, andlor violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant M e r objects because this request is vague and ambiguous. Defendant fkrther objects because this request is overbroad, unduly burdensome and oppressive. Fwther, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in full.

OWCST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 9
All documents sufficient to identify all Affiliate Marketing Programs, not including eBay's AffiliateMarketing Program, with whom Hogan or Hogan Entities obtained revenue or otherwise interacted. Response to Request for Production No. 9: Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501; the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant further objects because this request may be constnred to seek the production and inspection of documents which are privileged from disclosure by the attorney-client relationship andlor the attorney work product doctrine. Defendant further objects because this demand
may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain

proprietarylconfidential information, trade secrets, andlor violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant M e r objects because this request seeks the production of documents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects because this request is vague and ambiguous. Defendant further objects because this request is overbroad, unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates

the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in hll.

REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10
All documents relating to and/or describing methods and techniques used by any other Affiliate Marketing Program that Hogan or Hogan Entities interacted with, participated in or manipulated. 1.1.1 1.1.I
Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to Plaintiff's Requests For Production, Set One
Case No. CV 08-04052 JF
8

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page10 of 24

Xeswonse to Reauest for Production No. 10: Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege igainst self-incrimination under the Fi& Amendment to the United States Constiwtion; the Federal Xules of Evidence, Rule 501; the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence 2ode section 940. Defendant M e r objects because this request may be constmed to seek the xoduction and inspection of documents which are privileged from disclosure by the attorney-client :elationship and/or the attomey work product doctrine. Defendant fbrther objects because this demand nay be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietaryIconfidentid information, trade secrets, and/or violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant further objects because this request is overbroad, not reasonably particularized, and seeks the production of documents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects because this request is vague and ambiguous, and is argumentative with respect to its use of the term "manipulated." Defendant W e r objects because this request is unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminmy Statement herein by reference in full.

WOUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 11
All documents sufficient to identify the s o m e of any technology, technique or method used by Hogan or Hogan Entities to participate in, manipulate or interact with eBay Affiliate Marketing Program, or any other Affiliate Marketing Program. Response to Request for Production No. 11: Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501;the California Constitution, Article I, Section 15; and California ~vidence
\

Code section 940. Defendant further objects because this request may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which are privileged from disclosure by the attorney-client relationship and/or the attomey work product doctrine. Defendant further objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietary/ confidential information, trade secrets, and/or violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant fkther
Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to Plaintiffs Requests For Production, Set One
Case No. CV 08-04052 JF

9

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page11 of 24

objects because this request is overbroad, not reasonably particularized, and seeks the production of documents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects because this request is vague and ambiguous, and is argumentative with respect to its use of the term "manipulate." Defendant further objects because this request is compound, unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in full.

All documents sufficient to identify any individuals, groups, books, manuals or other materials

consulted by Hogan or Hogan Entities while developing any technology, technique or method used by Hogan or Hogan Entities while developing any technology, technique or method used by Hogan or Hogan Entities to participate in, manipulate or interact with the eBay Affiliate Marketing Program, or
my other Afliliate

Marketing Program.

Response to Request for Production No. 12: Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501; the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant futher objects because this request may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which are privileged from disclosure by the attorney-client relationship andlor the attorney work product doctrine. Defendant further objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietarylconfidential information, trade secrets, andlor violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant further objects because this request is overbroad, not reasonably particularized, and seeks the production of documents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant fbrther objects because this request is vague and ambiguous, and is argumentative with respect to its use of the term "manipulate." Defendant M h e r objects because this request is compound, unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in full.

1.1.1
Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to PIaintiff s Requests For Production, Set One
Case No.CV 08-04052 IF 10

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page12 of 24

WOUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 13
All documents relating to Cornmission Junction, including all agreements, terms of service and
1

.ems and conditions. Xesuonse to Request for Production No. 13: Objection, Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege lgainst self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 50 1;the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant further objects because this request may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which are privileged f?om disclosure by the attorney-client relationship andor the attorney work product docbrine. Defendant M e r objects because this demand may be consfxued to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietary/ zonfidential information, trade secrets, andlor violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant further objects because this request is vague and ambiguous. Defendant n t e r objects because this request is overbroad, unduly burdensome and opp~ssive.Further, Defendant .incorporatesthe above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in full.
.

EXEOUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 14
All documents relating to, or ~om&unications with, Commission Junction or any current or former employee of Commission Junction. Response to Reauest for Production No. 14: Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501; the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant further objects because this request may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which are privileged fiom disclosure by the attorney-client relationship and/or the attorney work product doctrine. Defendant,further objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietary/ confidential information, trade secrets, and/or violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant further objects because this request is vague and ambiguous. Defendant further objects because this request is
Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to Plaintiffs Requests For Production, Set One Case No. CV 08-04052 JF
11

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page13 of 24

~verbroad, unduly burdensome and oppressive, Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in full.

REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 15
A 1 documents relating to, or Comunications with, Digital Point Solutions, Inc., Kessler's 1 Flying Circus, Thunderwood Holdings, Inc., Dmhg'Enterprise, Inc. or briandunning.com. Reswase to Request for Production No. 15: Objection. D e f e n b t objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege qgainst self-inc-ation under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal

Rules of Evidence, Rule 501;the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant further objects because this request may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which are privileged fiom disclosure by the attorney-client relationship and/or the attorney work product doctrine. Defendant further objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietary1 confidential information, trade secrets, and/or violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant M c r objects because this request seeks the production of documents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, Defendant fbrther objects because this request is vague and ambiguous. Defmdant M e r objects because this request is compound, overbroad, and unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in full.

Rl3OUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 16
All Comunications with Todd Dunning or Brian Dunning. Response to Request for Production No. 16: Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501; the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant further objects to the extent this demand violates the privacy rights of Defendant andtor third parties. Defendant M e r objects because this request seeks the production of documents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the
Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to Plaintiffs Requests For Production, Set One Case No. CV 08-04052 JF
12

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page14 of 24

liscovery of admissible evidence. Defendant fixther objects because this request is vague and unbiguous. Defendant M e r objects because this request is overbroad, unduly burdensome and rppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in full.

iEQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 17
All documents relating to, or Communications with, Rachael Hughes, or any companies or

intities owned, controlled, &iliated 6 t h or used by Rachael Hughes, relating to eBaylsAffiliate vlarketing Program including, but not limited to, any a ~ e m e n t with Rachael Hughes and company s md any technology transferred to or from Rachael Hughes and company. Zes~onse Request for Production No. 17: to Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege igainst self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Kules of Evidence, Rule 501;the California Constitution, M c l e 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Clode section 940. Defendant M e r objects because this request may be construed to seek the 3roduction and inspection of documents which are privileged from disclosure by the attorney-client relationship andlor the attorney work product doctrine. Defendant further objects because this request seeks the production of documents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant W e r objects because this request is >verbroad,vague and ambiguous. Defendant further objects because this request is unduly burdensome md oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in

REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 18
All documents sufficient to descfibe all.phone numbers, ernail addresses, web pages, instant messenger or mail account. and social network accounts maintained, formerly maintained or registered to Hogan or Hogan Entities.

Res~onse Rwuest for Production No. 18: to Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501; the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence
Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to Plaintiffs Requests For Production, Set O e n Case No. CV 08-04052 JF
13

.

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page15 of 24

Code section 940. Defendant further objects because this request may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which are privileged fkom disclosure by the attorney-client relationship and/or the attorney work product doctrine. Defendant further objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietary/ confidential information, trade secrets, andlor violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant M e r objects because this request is overbroad, not reasonably particularized, and seeks the production of docunrents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects because this request is vague and ambiguous. Defendant fkther objects because this request is compound, unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in full.

REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 19
Documents suficient to identifj any Aliases used by Hogan or Hogan Entities in any Internet Forum at or within which Hogan or Hogan Entities discussed any aspect of their participation in, manipulation of or interaction with eBayisAffiliate Marketing Program, or any other Affiliate Marketing Programs, including, but not limited to, forums such as blogs, listservs, Usenet newsgoups or chat rooms. Response to Reauest for Production No. 19: Objection, Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501;the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant W e r objects because this request may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which are privileged $?om disclosure by the attorney-client relationship andlor the attorney work product doctrine. Defendant further objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietary/ confidential information, trade secrets, and/or violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant fbrther objects because this request is overbroad, not reasonably particularized, and seeks the production of documents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant fbrther objects because this request is vague, ambiguous,
Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to Plaintiffs Requests For Production, Set One
Case No.CV 08-04052 JF 14

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page16 of 24

and argumentative. Defendant further objects because this request is unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendmt incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference i full. n

REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 20
Documents sufficient to identify any Internet F o m at or within which Hogan or Hogan Entities discussed any aspect of their participation in, manipulation of or interaction with eBay's Affiliate Marketing Programs, hcludhg, but not limited to, f o m s such as blogs, listservs, Usenet newsgroups or chat rooms. Response to Reauest for Production No. 20: Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the groundsthat it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501;the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant W e r objects because this request may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which are privileged from disclosure by the attorney-client relationship andlor the attorney work product doctrine. Defendant further objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprieWIcoddentia1 i&ormation, trade secrets, andlor violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant further objects becau~e~this request is overbroad, not reasonably particularized, and seeks the production of documents wkich are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects because this request is vague, ambiguous, and argumentative. Defendant further objects because this request is unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in full.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 21
Documents sufficient to identie all internet service providers (ISPs) and IP addresses used by Hogan or Hogan Entities. Res~onse Request for Production No. 21: to Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to Plaintiff's Requests For Production, Set One
Case No. CV 08-04052 JF
15

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page17 of 24

Rules of Evidence, Rule 501; the California Constitution, Article I, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant further objects because this request may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which are privileged frorn'disclosureby the attorney-client relationship andfor the attorney work product doctrine. Defendant M e r objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietary/ confidential information, trade secrets, and/or violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant fkther objects because this request is compound, overbroad, not reasonably particularized, and seeks the production of documents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead
-,

to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant fkther objects because this request is vague and ambiguous. Defendant further objects because this request is unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in Ml.

REOUEST FOR PRODUGITON NO. 22
?

Documents smcient to identify all computers, sei%ers,'electronicdata storage and hosting companies, entities, or facilities used by Hogan or Hogan Entities. Response to Request for Production No. 22: Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501; the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant further objects because this request may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which are privileged from disclosure by the attorney-client relationship andlor the attorney work product doctrine. Defendant further objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietary/ coniidential information, trade secrets, andor violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant further objects because this request is overbroad, not reasonably particularized, and seeks the production of documents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects because this request is vague and ambiguous. Defendant fiather objects because this request is unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in full.
Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to Plaintiffs Requests For Production, Set One

Case No. CV 08-04052 JF
16

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page18 of 24

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 23

Documents sufficient to identi6 any entity used or hired to maintain or restore electronic data or systems relating to Hogan or Hogan Entities' participation in, manipulation of or interaction with eBay's . Affiliate Marketing Program. Res~onse Reauest for Production No. 23: to Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-hckhation under the Fiflh h e n d m e n t to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501; the California Constitution, Article I, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant further objects because this request may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which are privileged h m disclosure by the attorney-client relationship and/or the attorney work product doctrine. Defendant further objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietary/ confidential i.n&ormation, trade secrets, and/or violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant W e r objects because this request is vague and ambiguous, argumentative, overbroad, and unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in full.

REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.24
Documents sufficient to identify software used to clean, reformat or erase hard-driGes used by Hogan or Hogan Entities, or any equipment owned, used or maintained by Hogan or Hogan Entities. Res~onse Request for Production No. 24: to Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifih Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 50 1;the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant t l t e r objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietary/confidential information, trade secrets, and/or violates the privacy rights of Defendant and/or third parties. Defendant further objects because this request seeks the production of documents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects
Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to Plaintiffs Requests For Production, Set One Case No. CV 08-04052 JF
17

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page19 of 24

because this request is vague and ambiguous, overbroad, and unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporatesthe above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in full.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 25

All documents sufEcient to identify all business entities or fictitious business names currently or formerly maintained by Hogan. Response to Reauest for Production No. 25: Objection, Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incriminationunder the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501;the California Constitution,Article 1, Section 15; and Califiornia Evidence Code section 940. Defendant fkther'objects because this request may be constmed to seek the production and inspection of documents which are privileged &om disclosure by the attorney-client relationship and/or the attorney work product doctrine. Defendant further objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents wkch contain proprietary/ confidential information, trade secrets, andlor violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant further objects because this request is overbroad, not reasonably particularized, and seeks the production of documents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.. Defendant further objects because this request is vague, ambiguous, and unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in fkll.
REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 26

All documents reIating to the incorporation of any Hogan Entities. Response to Reauest for Production No. 26: Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United .States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501; the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant fixther objects because this request may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which are privileged from discIosure by the attorney-client. relationship and/or the attorney work product doctrine. Defendant fixther objects because this request
Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to Plaintiffs Requests For Production, Set One
.

Case No. CV 08-04052 JF
18

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page20 of 24

seeks the production of documents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant M e r objects because this request is vague and ambiguous, overbroad, and unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in full.

FlEOUE3T FOR PRODUCTION NO. 27
All documents filed by Hogan or Hogan Entities with any Secretary of State. Resuonse to Reguest for Production No. 27: Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 50 1;the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940, Defendant hrther objects because this request is overbroad, not reasonably particularized, and seeks the production of documents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects because

this request is vague, ambiguous, and unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant
incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in full.

REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 28
Documents sufficient to show the structure and organization of all Hogan Entities that were involved in or interacted with any Affiliate Marketing Program. Res~onse Reauest for Production No. 28: to Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 50 1;the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant further objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietarylconfidential information, trade secrets, andlor violates the privacy rights of Defendant and/or third parties. Defendant fixther objects because this request is overbroad, not reasonably particularized, and seeks the production of documents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects because this request is vague, ambiguous, and unduly
Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to Plaintiffs Requests For Production, Set One
Case No.CV 08-04052JF

19

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page21 of 24

)urdensoineand oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by eference in full.

mOUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 29
Documents sufficient to identify al employees, contractors or temporary employees of Hogan or l logan Entities, their dates of employment, duties, salary and any other compensation. ies~onse Reauest for Production No. 29: to Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege rgainst s e l f - k e n a t i o n under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal iules of Evidence, Rule 50 1;the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence :ode section 940. Defendant further objects because this demand may be construed to seek the xoduction and inspection of documents which contain proprietarylconfidential information, trade secrets, and/or violates the privacy rights of Defendant and/or third parties. Defendant further objects 2ecause this request is overbroad, not reasonably particularized, and seeks the production of documents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of ~dmissible evidence. Defendant fhrther objects because this request is vague, ambiguous, unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in full. REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 30
All documents constituting any Hogan Entities' annual, quarterly and monthly audited, compiled,

reviewed or unaudited financial statements, including all income statements and balance sheets of Hogan Entities. Resmnse to Request for Production No. 30: Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination dder.the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of ~vidence,' Rule 501;the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. 'Defendant further objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietary/confidential information, trade secrets, and/or violates the right to privacy of Defendant lindfor third parties. Defendant further objects
Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to Plaintiffs Requests For Production, Set One Case No. CV 08-04052 JF
.

20

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page22 of 24

because this request is overbroad, not reasonably particularized, and seeks the production of documents which axe neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects because this request is vague, ambiguous, and unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in full.

REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 31
A11 documents sufficient to identify all assets and f m c i a l accounts (including those outside of

the United States) maintained or formerly maintained by Hogan or Hogan Entities. Response to Request for Production No. 3 1: Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501; the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant fkrther objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and insption of documents which contain prop~etqIconfidential information, trade secrets, andlor violates the right to privacy of Defendant andfor third parties. Defendant m e r objects because this request is overbroad, not reasonably particularized, and seeks the of documents

which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects because this request is vague, ambiguous, and unduly burdensome and oppressive. Furthe'r, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in full.

REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.32
Documents constituting all Hogan Entities' tax returns for the years 2003 to the present. Res~onse Reauest for Production No. 32: to Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501;the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant further objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain confidential financial information and/or violates
Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to Plaintiffs Requests For Production, Set One
Case No. CV 08-04052 IF
21

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page23 of 24

the right to privacy of Defendant andlor third parties. Defendant further objects because this request is overbroad, not reasonably particularized, and seeks the production of documents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of tbis action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant further objects because this request is vague, ambiguous, and unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in full.

RICOWST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 33
Docments constibting Hogan's individual tax returns for the years 2003 to the present: Response to Request for Production No. 33 : objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501; the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant further objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain confidential financial information andor violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant fkther objects because this request is overbroad and seeks the production of documents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant M e r objects because this request is vague, ambiguous, and unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above

Preliminmy Statement herein by reference in fill.

REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 34
All documents relating to the trmsfer or assumption of any liability by Hogan or Hogan Entities. Res~onse Reauest for Production No. 34: to Objection. Defendant objects to this request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifih Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 501;the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant further objects because this request may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which are privileged from disclosure by the attorney-client relationship andlor the attorney work product doctrine. Defendant M e r objects because this demand may be construed to seek the production and inspection of documents which contain proprietary
Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to Plaintiffs Requests For Production, Set One Case No. CV 08-04052 IF
22

Case5:08-cv-04052-JF Document129-5

Filed09/29/09 Page24 of 24

/confidentid information, trade secrets, and/or violates Defendant's right to privacy. Defendant further objects because this request is overbroad, not reasonably particularized, and seeks the production of documents which are neither relevant to the subject matter of this action, nor likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant furfher objects because this request is vague, ambiguous, and unduly burdensome and oppressive. Further, Defendant incorporates the above Preliminary Statement herein by reference in full.

All documents relating to any insurance policies relevant to this action. Response to Request for Production No. 35: Objection. Defendant objects to &is request on the grounds that it violates Defendant's privilege against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 50 1;the California Constitution, Article I, Section 15; and California Evidence Code section 940. Defendant further objects because t i request may be construed to seek the hs production and inspection of documents which are privileged .eom disclosure by the attorney-client relationship and/or the attorney work product doctrine, Defendant further objects because this request is vague and ambiguous. Further, Defendant inco~orates above Preliminary Statement herein by the reference in full. DATED: March 12,2009 COAST LAW GROUP LLP

-

and Digital Point Solutions, Inc.

Defendant Shawn Hogan's Responses to Plaintiffs Requests For Production, Set One

Case No. CV 08-04052 JF
23