Interserve, Inc. et al v. Fusion Garage PTE. LTD

Filing 179

Memorandum in Opposition re 164 MOTION to Compel Withheld Information and Documents filed byFusion Garage PTE. LTD. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Joshua L. Sohn, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit C, # 5 Exhibit D, # 6 Exhibit E, # 7 Exhibit F)(Pennypacker, Evette) (Filed on 9/23/2010)

Interserve, Inc. et al v. Fusion Garage PTE. LTD

Doc. 179 Att. 1

1 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP Claude M. Stern (Bar No. 96737) [e-mail] 2 Evette Pennypacker (Bar No. 203515) [e-mail] 3 Thomas R. Watson (Bar No. 227264) [e-mail] 4 555 Twin Dolphin Dr., 5th floor 5 Redwood Shores, CA 94065 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Joshua L. Sohn (Bar No. 250105) Sam S. Stake (Bar No. 257916) 50 California Street, 22nd Floor 8 San Francisco, CA 94111 [phone] 9 Telephone: Facsimile: [phone] 10 Attorneys for Defendant Fusion Garage PTE Ltd. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 TECHCRUNCH, INC., a Delaware corporation, and CRUNCHPAD, INC., a 18 Delaware corporation, 19 20 vs. Plaintiffs, CASE NO. C 09-cv-5812 RS (PVT) DECLARATION OF JOSHUA L. SOHN IN SUPPORT OF FUSION GARAGE'S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF WITHHELD INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 7

21 FUSION GARAGE PTE LTD., a Singapore company, 22 Defendant. 23 24 25 26 27 28

Case No. C 09-cv-5812 RS (PVT) Sohn Decl. ISO Fusion Garage's Opposition to Motion to Compel Dockets.Justia.com

1 2

I, JOSHUA L. SOHN, declare as follows: 1. I am a member of the bar of the State of California and an associate in Quinn

3 Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, attorneys for Defendant Fusion Garage. Unless otherwise 4 noted, I make this declaration of personal knowledge, and if called and sworn as a witness, I could 5 and would testify competently thereto. 6 2. Fusion Garage has produced roughly 35,000 pages of documents, which is nearly

7 double the volume of Plaintiffs' production. 8 3. Fusion Garage has agreed to provide witnesses to testify about the development of

9 its web tablet. The parties are currently trying to schedule depositions in Singapore for November. 10 4. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs' Statement of

11 Misappropriated Business Ideas, dated April 23, 2010. 12 5. Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of excerpts of Plaintiff

13 TechCrunch's Second Supplemental Responses to Fusion Garage's First Set of Interrogatories, 14 dated July 19, 2010. 15 6. Attached hereto as Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of excerpts from the

16 deposition of Brian Kindle, dated August 19, 2010. 17 7. Attached hereto as Exhibit D is a true and correct copy of excerpts from the

18 deposition of TechCrunch's 30(b)(6) witness, Michael Arrington, dated April 20, 2010. 19 8. Attached hereto as Exhibit E is a true and correct copy of a Twitter message

20 purportedly authored by Michael Arrington, dated August 29, 2010. 21 9. Attached hereto as Exhibit F is a true and correct copy of excerpts from the Twitter

22 feed of Michael Arrington, dated September 15-16, 2010. 23 10. Attached hereto as Exhibit G is a true and correct copy of a document produced by

24 Plaintiffs in this litigation, bearing Bates numbers TC00000557-61. 25 11. Attached hereto as Exhibit H is a true and correct copy of excerpts from the

26 deposition of Heather Harde, dated August 11, 2010. 27 28
Case No. C 09-cv-5812 RS (PVT) Sohn Decl. ISO Fusion Garage's Opposition to Motion to Compel

1

12.

Attached hereto as Exhibit I is a true and correct copy of excerpts of Fusion

2 Garage's Supplemental Objections and Responses to Plaintiffs' First and Second Set of Requests 3 for Production, dated July 19, 2010. 4 13. Attached hereto as Exhibit J is a true and correct copy of excerpts of Fusion

5 Garage's Responses to Plaintiffs' Fifth Set of Requests for Production, dated July 22, 2010. 6 14. Attached hereto as Exhibit K is a true and correct copy of excerpts from the

7 Declaration of Chandrasekar Rathakrishnan in Support of Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion to 8 Preliminary Injunction, previously filed in this action as Dkt. No. 75. 9 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the

10 foregoing is true and correct. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Case No. C 09-cv-5812 RS (PVT) -2Sohn Decl. ISO Fusion Garage's Oppositon to Motion to Compel

Executed this 23rd day of September 2010 at San Francisco, California. /s/ Joshua L. Sohn Joshua L. Sohn