In Re FACEBOOK INTERNET TRACKING LITIGATION
Filing
162
MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs Third Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint filed by Facebook Inc.. Motion Hearing set for 11/16/2017 09:00 AM in Courtroom 4, 5th Floor, San Jose before Hon. Edward J. Davila. Responses due by 10/13/2017. Replies due by 10/27/2017. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Matthew D. Brown In Support of Defendant Facebook, Inc.s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Third Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint, #2 Exhibit 1 to Brown Declaration, #3 Exhibit 2 to Brown Declaration, #4 Exhibit 3 to Brown Declaration, #5 Exhibit 4 to Brown Declaration, #6 Exhibit 5 to Brown Declaration, #7 Exhibit 6 to Brown Declaration, #8 Proposed Order)(Brown, Matthew) (Filed on 9/8/2017)
Exhibit 1
Brown, Matthew D.
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Gutkin, Jeff
Wednesday, July 18, 2012 11:22 AM
Chip Robertson; jimf@bflawfirm.com; dstraite@stewartslaw.com
Brown, Matthew D.; Wong, Kyle
Cookie MDL - Rule 26(f) conference and Proposed Schedule
Counsel:
I write to confirm and follow up on a few points we discussed during our 26(f) conference call this past Friday.
Although we discussed a possible hearing date of September 28, 2012 for our motion to dismiss, we realized
that we may have a conflict on our side and may need to push the hearing until October 5, 2012. We will likely
know more about that conflict after a case management conference in another matter next Wednesday, so we
will circle back with you late next week to determine whether to propose September 28 or October 5 in our
submission to the Court. Please let us know if October 5 does not work for you. Once the date is settled, we will
prepare a stipulation and proposed order setting the date, and circulate it for your approval.
The parties also discussed the case schedule, and we’ve attached our proposal for your review. Note that this
schedule reflects our suggestion to bifurcate discovery, which we know you wanted additional time to consider.
We have also used fixed dates for the class certification briefing, which we strongly prefer, because they enable
us to manage the case and our workloads in an efficient manner, without having to prepare (often needlessly)
for the potential fire drill of your motion coming in sooner than expected.
With respect to discovery, Plaintiffs indicated that they had begun to prepare an ESI production proposal. While
it’s likely too soon for us to finalize the protocols for ESI production, particularly given that we don’t yet know
the volume or scope of discovery, we are fine with beginning the discussion by reviewing your draft proposal
whenever it is ready. David Straite also stated that Plaintiffs had already begun drafting a protective order to
govern production in the case, based on the Northern District of California’s form order. Facebook is happy to
review a draft of that whenever it is ready for our review. Finally, regarding the preservation of data logs in
connection with this action, as we discussed, Facebook will agree to retain all cookie data logs it has today for
U.S. users (not users outside the U.S.), for the entire Class Period, and will include an additional 90 days (up to
December 25, 2011) after the end of the Class Period. Please let us know if you have any issues with this
approach by Monday, July 23.
Redacted
Again, please let us know if the October 5 hearing date works on your end, in case our conflict with the
September 28 can’t be cleared.
Thanks all.
1
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?