Mformation Technologies, Inc. v. Research in Motion Limited et al

Filing 700

PRELIMINARY PRETRIAL CONFERENCE SCHEDULING ORDER - (JURY TRIAL); NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPOINT A TECHNICAL ADVISOR; ORDER REFERRING THE PARTIES TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE LAPORTE FOR A FURTHER SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE. Signed by Judge James Ware on January 31, 2012. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(jwlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/31/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
9
Mformation Technologies, Inc.,

NO. C 08-04990 JW

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
PRELIMINARY PRETRIAL CONFERENCE
SCHEDULING ORDER - (JURY TRIAL);
NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPOINT A
TECHNICAL ADVISOR; ORDER
REFERRING THE PARTIES TO
MAGISTRATE JUDGE LAPORTE FOR A
FURTHER SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

Plaintiff,
11
v.
12
Research in Motion Ltd., et al.,
13
Defendants.
14
15

/

16
17

On January 30, 2012, the Court conducted a Preliminary Pretrial Conference. Counsel for

18

the respective parties were present. In light of the discussion at the conference, the Court orders as

19

follows:

20

(1) On or before February 1, 2012, Defendants shall propound all additional interrogatories

21

and requests for admission with respect to the late-disclosed 2000 source code to Plaintiff. On or

22

before February 17, 2012, Plaintiff shall respond to Defendants’ additional discovery requests. On

23

or before February 28, 2012, Defendants shall depose Plaintiff’s witness pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.

24

30(b)(6).

25

(2) The Court finds good cause to construe the term “establishing a connection between the

26

wireless device and the server.” On or before February 10, 2012, the parties shall file simultaneous

27

briefs on this subject, not to exceed ten pages in length. The Court will not entertain response or

28

1

reply briefs. Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, the matter will be taken under submission for

2

decision without oral argument.

3

(3) The Court sets March 12, 2012 at 9 a.m. for a hearing on Defendants’ Motion for

4

Sanctions. To allow the parties to utilize the results of further discovery in their briefing, the Court

5

ORDERS expedited briefing as follows:

6

(a) On or before March 2, 2012, Defendants shall file their opening brief;

7

(b) On or before March 6, 2012, Plaintiff shall file its response.

8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

(4) The Court GRANTS Defendants leave to file one additional Daubert motion. The Court
sets March 12, 2012 at 9 a.m. as a hearing date for this motion. The parties shall brief this motion
in accordance with the Civil Local Rules.

11

(5) The Court continues the hearing on Defendants’ Motion to Bifurcate Trial1 currently

12

noticed for March 5, 2012 to March 12, 2012 at 9 a.m. to coincide with the hearing on all other

13

Motions. The Court amends its requirement that Plaintiff responds to this Motion by Friday,

14

February 3, 2012. Instead, Plaintiff shall file its Opposition in accordance with the Civil Local

15

Rules.

16

(6) No other Motions shall be filed at this time.

17

(7) On or before February 3, 2012, the parties shall contact the chambers of Magistrate

18

Judge Laporte to schedule a Further Settlement Conference in accordance with her availability.

19

(8) In Paragraph 3(b) of this Pretrial Order, the parties will find the Court’s directions with

20

respect to motions in limine. In addition to the limitations provided in that paragraph, the parties

21

shall file a maximum of five (5) motions in limine per side. The Court will not entertain motions

22

addressing multiple issues; each motion should address one discrete, significant issue for

23

consideration.

24
25
26
27
28

1

(Docket Item No. 697.)
2

1
2

(9) Upon evaluation of the preparation required for the trial of this case, the Court finds that
it would benefit from the services of a technical advisor.

3

a.

Standards

4

A district judge has inherent authority to appoint a technical advisor when the judge deems it

5

desirable and necessary. Ass’n of Mexican-Am. Educators v. California, 231 F.3d 572, 590 (9th Cir.

6

2000) (en banc). The exercise of this authority should be used sparingly and only in highly

7

complicated cases. TechSearch, L.L.C. v. Intel Corp., 286 F.3d 1360, 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2002)

8

(interpreting the Ninth Circuit standard for appointing technical advisors). In those limited cases,

9

where the complexity of the science and technology involves something well beyond regular

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

questions of fact and law, the district court has the inherent authority to tap the outside skill and

11

expertise of a technical advisor. Fed. Trade Comm’n v. Enforma Natural Prod., Inc., 362 F.3d 1204,

12

1213 (9th Cir. 2004); see also Reilly v. United States, 863 F.2d 149, 157 (1st Cir. 1988). The

13

technical advisor acts as educator, advising on terminology so that the district court can better

14

understand complex evidence and properly discharge its role as decisionmaker. See TechSearch,

15

286 F.3d at 1377.

16

In Reilly, while conceding that a district court has inherent authority to appoint an expert as a

17

technical advisor, the appellant argued that such power is strictly circumscribed by Fed. R. Evid.

18

706(a). 863 F.2d at 154. The First Circuit held the plain language of Rule 706(a) indicates that the

19

rule is confined to court-appointed expert witnesses and does not embrace expert advisors or

20

consultants:

21
22
23

[Rule 706(a)] establishes a procedural framework for nomination and selection of an expert
witness and for the proper performance of his role after an appointment is accepted. . . . By
and large, these modalities–though critically important in the realm customarily occupied by
an expert witness–have marginal, if any, relevance to the functioning of technical advisors.
Since an advisor, by definition, is called upon to make no findings and to supply no evidence
. . . provisions for depositions, cross-questioning, and the like are inapposite.

24
Id. at 155-56.
25
26
27
28

3

1
2
3
4
5

b.

Proposed Order of Appointment

Accordingly, the Court gives notice to the parties that the Court intends to appoint Mr. Kwan
Chan2 as a “Technical Advisor” under the following terms:
1. Any advice provided to the Court by Mr. Chan will not be based on any extra-record
information.

6

2. To the extent that the Court may ask Mr. Chan to provide a formal written report on

7

technical advice concerning the case, a copy of the formal written report prepared by Mr. Chan shall

8

be provided to the parties. However, the Court reserves the right to have informal verbal

9

communications with Mr. Chan which are not included in any formal written report.

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

3. Mr. Chan may attend all case-related court proceedings, including the trial that is

11

scheduled to commence on June 14, 2012, to assist the Court in evaluating any technical issues that

12

may arise as the result of conflicting expert reports on the technology and prior art.

13

4. Mr. Chan may review any pleadings, motions or documents submitted to the Court.

14

5. As a Technical Advisor, Mr. Chan will make no written findings of fact and will not

15

supply any evidence to the Court. Thus, Mr. Chan will be outside the purview of “expert witnesses”

16

under Fed. R. Evid. 706. As such, the provisions in Rule 706 for depositions and questioning of

17

expert witnesses will be inapplicable to Mr. Chan. See Reilly, 863 F.2d at 155-56.

18
19
20

6. Mr. Chan will have no contact with any of the parties or their counsel except for billing
purposes.
7. Each party shall bear the cost of the Technical Advisor on a per capita basis, payable in

21

advance. Within ten (10) days of appointment, the parties shall meet and confer with Mr. Chan and

22

develop a plan to set up a trust account whereby the parties shall deposit, initially, $25,000 each to

23

cover the anticipated fees and costs. Mr. Chan shall issue statements to the parties and draw from

24

the trust account every fifteen (15) days for his performance of the appointment. Mr. Chan will bill

25

at the rate of $500.00 per hour.

26
27
28

2

Attached to this Proposed Order is a courtesy copy of Mr. Chan’s resume.
4

1

The Technical Advisor shall report to the Court on a periodic basis, every sixty (60) days,

2

regarding the state of his fees and expenses and make a recommendation to the Court as to whether

3

the trust account needs additional deposits from the parties as the case progresses. All matters

4

pertaining to the fees of Mr. Chan are referred to the assigned Magistrate Judge.

5

8. Mr. Chan shall file a declaration that he will adhere to the terms of his appointment.

6

9. On or before February 10, 2012, any party to the litigation wishing to object to Mr.

7

Chan’s appointment on any ground shall file a Notice of Objection to Appointment of Technical

8

Advisor. Among the grounds for objection, the Court specifically would wish to know of any

9

objection based on the following grounds:

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

(a) Bias on the part of Mr. Chan;

11

(b) Lack of funds to share the fees of the advisor on the part of the objecting party.

12

Any objection shall be lodged directly with the Magistrate Judge.3 The objection shall state

13

the grounds of objection and be accompanied by a supporting declaration and legal memorandum

14

supporting the objection. The Magistrate Judge shall not advise Judge Ware of the identity of any

15

party making an objection. The Magistrate Judge may confer with the parties to determine if any

16

modification of the terms of appointment would overcome the objection. If there are objections, the

17

Court requests that on or before February 17, 2012, the Magistrate Judge submits a

18

recommendation to Judge Ware in accordance with paragraphs 1-7 or as modified, or of

19

non-appointment due to objections. Judge Ware shall determine whether to make the appointment

20

under any modified terms of appointment.

21
22
23
24
25
26
3

27

The Court refers this matter to the Chief Magistrate Judge to assign the appropriate Magistrate
Judge to review potential objections and to review, post-appointment, any fees dispute that may arise.

28

5

1

(10) TRIAL SCHEDULE

2

Final Pretrial Conference (¶4 )
(.14 days before Jury Selection)

June 4, 2012 at 10 a.m.

Joint Pretrial Conference Statement, In
Limine Motions, and Proposed Jury
Instructions Due
(.30 days before Final Pretrial Conference)

May 4, 2012

3
4
5
6

8

Once the in limine binders are lodged with
the Court (¶3(b)), the Court will determine
whether a hearing is necessary for the
motions in advance of the Final Pretrial
Conference and set the hearing accordingly.

9

Jury Selection

7

June 14, 2012

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

The Court reserves June 15, 2012 as a date
to meet with the parties to resolve any
outstanding issues before trial.

11
12
13
14
15
16

Jury Trial Date and Sessions
Sessions 1-8
Sessions 9-16
Sessions 17-18
Sessions 19-22

June 19-22, 2012; 9-12 noon, 1-4 p.m.
June 26-29, 2012; 9-12 noon, 1-4 p.m.
July 3, 2012; 9-12 noon, 1-4 p.m.
July 5-6, 2012; 9-12 noon, 1-4 p.m.

Argue & Submit

July 10, 2012 at 9 a.m.

Jury Deliberations

July 10-13, 2012, if needed

17
18
Meet and Confer Requirement
19
1.

No later than 30 days prior to the Final Pretrial Conference, the parties shall meet and

20
confer with respect to the Joint Pretrial Conference Statement, submission of a joint list of witnesses,
21
a joint list of trial exhibits and a joint list of discovery material which each party intends to offer in
22
evidence as a part of its case-in-chief. Unless objections are made in accord with this Order, all
23
witnesses, exhibits and discovery material contained on the joint submission shall be deemed
24
admissible into evidence by stipulation.
25
26
27
28

6

1
2

Objections and Lodging Disputed Material with the Court
2.

If a party objects to receipt into evidence of a witness, exhibits or discovery response,

3

the party shall advise all opposing parties during the conference described in Paragraph 1, and

4

attempt to resolve the dispute. If the parties are unsuccessful in resolving the dispute, any party

5

wishing to object to receipt of the testimony of any witness, any exhibit or discovery response into

6

evidence shall lodge with Chambers a copy of the disputed material at the commencement of trial.

7

Attached to the submission shall be a brief statement of the objection and any response by the

8

proffering party. The Court will indicate on the submitted copy whether the objection is overruled

9

or sustained and return the material to counsel.

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

Lodging Joint Pretrial Conference Statement, in Limine Motions

11

and Proposed Jury Instructions

12
13
14

3.

Pursuant to the date set forth in the Case Schedule, the parties shall file and lodge

with Chambers the following:
a.

Joint Pretrial Conference Statement: The parties shall file a joint pretrial

15

statement which shall contain the following information: (1) a brief

16

description of the substance of claims and defenses which remain to be

17

decided; (2) a detailed statement of all the relief claimed, particularly

18

itemizing all elements of damages claimed as well as witnesses, documents or

19

other evidentiary material to be presented concerning the amount of those

20

damages; (3) a plain and concise statement of all relevant facts not reasonably

21

disputable, as well as which facts the parties will stipulate for incorporation

22

into the trial record without the necessity of supporting testimony or exhibits;

23

(4) a plain and concise statement of all disputed factual issues which remain

24

to be decided; (5) a statement assessing whether all or part of the action may

25

be presented upon an agreed statement of facts; (6) a statement of stipulations

26

requested or proposed for pretrial or trial purposes; (7) without extended legal

27

argument, a concise statement of each disputed point of law concerning

28

7

1

liability or relief, citing supporting statutes and decisions; (8) a list of all

2

witnesses likely to be called at trial; (9) a list of evidence the parties intend to

3

present at trial through use of excerpts from depositions, from interrogatory

4

answers, or from responses to requests for admission; and (10) any other

5

subjects relevant to the trial of the action, or material to its just, speedy and

6

inexpensive determination. Counsel are directed to meet and confer in

7

advance of the date for submission of pretrial material with respect to the

8

pretrial conference statement.

9

b.

In Limine Motions: Any in limine motions shall be filed in writing and

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

submitted along with the Joint Final Pretrial Conference Statement. Any

11

opposition shall be filed in writing and served no later than ten (10) days after

12

the opening briefs have been filed and served. Fifteen (15) days before the

13

date of the Final Pretrial Conference, the parties shall organize their in limine

14

motions as follows:

15

(1)

16
17
18
19
(2)
20
21
22
23

(3)

Each side shall be responsible for producing a combined folder with
all of their in limine motions, oppositions to their motions (if any), and
replies (if any), respectively. The motion papers shall be clearly
marked and separated in one single binder. The binder shall contain a
table of contents, listing each motion with a short sentence regarding
the grounds for in limine and a short sentence regarding the
opposition; all statements must be supported by proper citations to the
motions. The table of contents shall also be saved on a CD in MS
Word or WordPerfect format to be attached inside the binder.
Please note that this binder is not a substitute for filing the motions
and related papers via ECF; it is designed for the Court to evaluate the
motions.
Two copies of the binder shall be delivered to the Court (by way of the
Clerk’s Office) no later than fifteen (15) days before the date of the
Final Pretrial Conference by 3 PM. The parties must also bring the
binder to the Final Pretrial Conference for their own references.
These motions will be deemed submitted without oral argument,
unless the Court orders otherwise.

24
c.

The parties shall filed their Proposed Jury

Proposed Jury Instructions:

25
Instructions thirty (30) days before the date of the Final Pretrial Conference.
26
27
28

8

1

The parties shall bring to the Final Pretrial Conference their Proposed

2

Jury Instructions on a CD in MS Word or WordPerfect format.

3
4

Final Pretrial Conference
4.

The Court will conduct a Final Pretrial Conference on the date set forth in the Case

5

Schedule. The trial attorneys must attend the conference. At the final pretrial conference, the Court

6

will consider issues raised in the Final Pretrial Conference Statement, motions in limine and discuss

7

the procedures for trial of the case.

8
9

Lodging Witness Lists and Exhibit Lists
5.

At the Final Pretrial Conference, the parties shall lodge with Chambers the joint list

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

of witnesses, and a joint list of exhibits. Unless otherwise ordered, all exhibits shall be in a format

11

compatible with either the video or digital evidence presentation system utilized by the Court. The

12

proffering party shall retain custody of all exhibits, schedules, summaries, diagrams or charts to be

13

used at the trial.

14

6.

To accommodate consideration of electronic exhibits, as the trial progresses, the

15

parties will load images of the admitted exhibits onto a stand alone hard drive or CD or DVD in

16

“pdf” format. The parties shall ensure that, apart from whatever technical material is necessary to

17

operate the system, the CD, DVD or hard drive contains only the items specified in this order and

18

nothing else. The images will be placed in a folder labeled “Admitted Exhibits” that shall contain

19

all trial exhibits received into evidence. In addition to the exhibits, themselves, the folder shall

20

contain a file labeled “List of Admitted Exhibits by Exhibit Number.” The “List” shall list in

21

numerical order by Trial Exhibit Number, each admitted exhibit, along with the date of the

22

document (where available), and a brief description of the exhibit. To the extent practicable, the

23

“List” shall be text searchable and hyperlinked to the Exhibits, themselves. The folder shall contain

24

a second filed labeled “List of Admitted Exhibits by Date.” This second “List” shall contain the

25

same information, except that the exhibits will be listed in chronological order, according to the date

26

the document was prepared. The external stand alone hard drive or CD or DVD and a printed copy

27

of the exhibit lists will be marked as exhibits and placed in evidence as demonstrative exhibits.

28
9

7.

1

Before the case is submitted for decision, each party will be deemed to have had an

2

opportunity to review the material described in the previous paragraph to ensure their accuracy.

3

Unless a party objects before the case is submitted for decision to the judge or jury, the party will be

4

deemed to have waived any and all objections to the submitted materials.

5

8.

To accommodate review of electronic exhibits, the parties will jointly provide the

6

jury with the following equipment: a laptop computer, the external stand alone hard drive, CD or

7

DVD, a printer (and, if practicable, an LCD projector).

8

9.

During its closing instructions, the Court will advise the jury of the form in which

exhibits will be submitted to them. The jury will also be instructed that, unless impracticable, upon

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

9

a juror’s written request, a printed copy of any exhibit received in evidence will be provided to the

11

jury. Before the jury retires to deliberate, the parties will provide a tutorial to the jurors on how to

12

operate the equipment, how to view the exhibits, and how to print the exhibits if the jury wishes to

13

do so. A written set of instructions on operations of the equipment will be sent into the jury room.

14

10.

When the jury is deliberating, at least one lawyer for each side shall remain in close

15

proximity to the courtroom. In the event of any technical problem, or if the jurors have questions

16

about how to operate the equipment, the jurors shall pass a note to the clerk, just as with any other

17

questions they may have. The Court will read the note to the lawyers. Those lawyers shall consult

18

with each other and with their respective technicians, and propose to the Court how they wish to

19

address the technical problem.

20

11.

The parties shall maintain a backup laptop computer and a backup hard drive with

21

identical images and data at the courthouse such that, in the event of a technical problem that cannot

22

be quickly and easily remedied, the equipment can be replaced.

23

12.

Unless the Court orders otherwise for good cause shown, the expense of the

24

equipment and the costs of preparation of the Lists and Exhibits will be shared equally among the

25

parties.

26
27

13.

This Standing Order also applies to cases tried to the Court sitting without a jury,

except that paragraphs 8-11 do not apply.

28
10

1
2
3

14.

The parties are ordered to meet and confer in advance of trial to establish a procedure

for complying with this Order with respect to electronic exhibits.
15.

Upon request, in non-complex cases the Court will excuse the parties from using

4

electronic formatted documents. In that event on the first day of trial, the parties shall submit

5

exhibits as follows:

6

a.

A copy for the trial judge;

7

b.

A copy for the witness stand.

8

c.

No duplicates of a document shall be submitted, unless the duplicate copy has

9

independent evidentiary value to prove some disputed issue of material fact

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

(e.g., date stamp to prove receipt on a particular date, where date of receipt is

11

a disputed issue of a material fact).

12
13

Jury Trial Schedule
16.

The time allowed for trial shall be divided equally between the plaintiff’s side and the

14

defendant’s side. Co-parties are ordered to meet, confer and agree to an allocation among

15

themselves. A party may spend its allocated time presenting its own case or on cross-examination of

16

witnesses called by other parties or for presentation of a counterclaim. When a party's allocated time

17

period has expired, unless otherwise ordered for good cause shown, no further time will be allowed

18

to that party if it would interfere with the ability of the opposing party to present its case.

19
20
21
22
23

Trial Procedure
17.

In opening statements, counsel shall not express personal knowledge or opinion

concerning any matter in issue.
18.

Counsel must question witnesses from the podium, using the microphone. Without

requesting permission, counsel may approach witnesses for any proper purposes.

24

19.

Address all remarks to the Court, not to opposing counsel.

25

20.

Refer to all persons, including witnesses, other counsel and the parties by their

26
27
28

surnames and not by their first or given names.
21.

In examining a witness, counsel shall not repeat or echo the answer given by the

witness.
11

1

22.

Counsel must stand when making an objection.

2

23.

Conferences at the bench or sidebar are not favored by the Court. Any sidebar

3

conferences which are allowed will be off the record. If any counsel wishes to place matters on the

4

record, he or she may so request, and the Court will make a responsive order.

5

24.

Counsel have full responsibility to arrange for the appearance of witnesses during the

6

presentation of their case so as to eliminate delay caused by waiting for witnesses who have been

7

placed on call by counsel.

8

25.

Unless an agreement to the contrary is entered into by opposing counsel, all nonparty

or nonexpert witnesses will be excluded from the courtroom when not testifying. When a witness

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

9

has completed his or her testimony, the witness is excused unless counsel indicates that he or she

11

wishes the witness to remain subject to being recalled. Any witness who has been excused from

12

further testimony may remain as a spectator. It will be the responsibility of counsel to make an

13

announcement at the time the witness steps down that he or she should remain in the environs of the

14

Court for a reasonable time to permit such counsel an opportunity to secure and serve a subpoena

15

upon the witness and assume responsibility for his or her per diem and other expenses as provided

16

by governing rule or statute.

17

26.

Counsel shall admonish all persons at counsel table that gestures, facial expressions,

18

audible comments, or the like, as manifestations of approval or disapproval during the testimony of

19

witnesses, or at any other time, are prohibited.

20

27.

Witness examination shall consist of direct examination, cross-examination and re-

21

direct examination. No recross-examination will be allowed without prior approval of the Court

22

specifically indicating the area for recross-examination. When there are multiple defense counsel,

23

they are directed to confer and designate to the Court the sequence in which they wish to be

24

recognized during trial for purposes of presenting opening statements and conducting cross-

25

examination of witnesses. If one counsel conducts the direct examination of a witness, that same

26

counsel must make objections when the witness is cross-examined. Counsel who will conduct the

27

cross-examination should object while the witness is on direct.

28
12

1

28.

After the commencement of trial testimony, upon request of co-parties, any objection,

2

motion or other application for relief made by any co-party, orally or in writing, shall be deemed to

3

be adopted and joined in by every other co-party, without announcement by counsel to that effect,

4

and the rulings of the Court shall be deemed applicable to each party unless otherwise stated at the

5

time the ruling is made. Accordingly, it shall be regarded as unnecessary and improper for counsel

6

to rise to "join in" an objection or motion. Rather, counsel should rise to be heard only for the

7

purpose of expressly opting out of an objection or motion if that is his or her position.

8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

29.

Counsel are directed to deliver to opposing counsel at the end of each trial day (if not

earlier) a list of witnesses counsel anticipates calling the next trial day.
30.

Counsel calling a non-client witness to testify should have no further discussions with

11

that witness concerning the case or any aspect of his or her testimony after the witness has been

12

tendered for cross-examination and until such time as the witness has been tendered back for redirect

13

examination. At all other times, within the bounds of governing ethics and the law, counsel may

14

engage in discussions with witnesses during trial.

15

31.

Any time taken away from presentation of evidence to the trier of fact due to, for

16

example, lengthy legal motions made during the time allocated to the presentation of evidence, or

17

delays in the commencement of proceedings due to circumstances within the control of counsel, will

18

be deducted from the time allocated for the presentation of evidence. Upon timely application based

19

upon good cause, the Court may relieve a party of its stipulation to the agreed schedule.

20

32.

It is the practice of the Court periodically to inform counsel of the Court's record of

21

how much time each side has remaining for the presentation of evidence based upon the stipulated

22

trial schedule.

23
24

Dated: January 31, 2012
JAMES WARE
United States District Chief Judge

25
26
27
28

13

1

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDER HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO:

2

Aaron D. Charfoos [e-mail]
Allen A. Arntsen [e-mail]
Amardeep Lal Thakur [e-mail]
Christopher R. Liro [e-mail]
Eugene Goryunov [e-mail]
Ferlillia Victoria Roberson [e-mail]
Jessica Christine Kaiser [e-mail]
Justin Edwin Gray [e-mail]
Linda S. DeBruin [e-mail]
Lisa Marie Noller [e-mail]
Marc Howard Cohen [e-mail]
Maria A. Maras [e-mail]
Meredith Zinanni [e-mail]
Michael Anthony Parks [e-mail]
Michael Daley Karson [e-mail]
Michael S Feldberg [e-mail]
Shawn Edward McDonald [e-mail]
Tiffany Patrice Cunningham [e-mail]

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12

Dated: January 31, 2012

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

13
By:
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

14

/s/ JW Chambers
Susan Imbriani
Courtroom Deputy