Campbell et al v. Facebook Inc.

Filing 77

Joint Discovery Letter Brief Regarding Plaintiffs' Responses to Facebook's Interrogatories filed by Facebook Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits A-F)(Jessen, Joshua) (Filed on 5/20/2015)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
JOSHUA A. JESSEN, SBN 222831
[e-mail]
JEANA BISNAR MAUTE, SBN 290573
[e-mail]
ASHLEY M. ROGERS, SBN 286252
[e-mail]
1881 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, California 94304
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
GAIL E. LEES, SBN 90363
[e-mail]
CHRISTOPHER CHORBA, SBN 216692
[e-mail]
333 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, California 90071
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
FACEBOOK, INC.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15
16
17

OAKLAND DIVISION
MATTHEW CAMPBELL, MICHAEL
HURLEY, and DAVID SHADPOUR,

18
19
20

Case No. C 13-05996 PJH
CONSOLIDATED CLASS ACTION

Plaintiffs,

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST
SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO
PLAINTIFF MATTHEW CAMPBELL

v.
FACEBOOK, INC.,

21

Defendant.

22
23

PROPOUNDING PARTY:

FACEBOOK, INC.

24

RESPONDING PARTY:

MATTHEW CAMPBELL

25

SET NO.

ONE (1)

26
27
28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF MATTHEW CAMPBELL
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26 and 33 (the “Federal Rules”), Defendant

2

Facebook, Inc., by and through its undersigned counsel, hereby propounds the following first set of

3

interrogatories (“Interrogatories”) on Plaintiff Matthew Campbell to be answered separately and

4

under oath, within thirty (30) days after service hereof. For purposes of these Interrogatories, the

5

following definitions and instructions shall apply:

6

DEFINITIONS

7

1.

“ACTION” means and refers to the above-captioned lawsuit entitled Matthew

8

Campbell et al. v. Facebook, Inc., Case No. C 13-05996 PJH, now pending in the United States

9

District Court for the Northern District of California, and assigned to the Honorable Phyllis J.

10

Hamilton.

11

2.

“YOU,” “YOUR,” and/or “YOURSELF” refers to Matthew Campbell, a Plaintiff in

12

the ACTION, and anyone acting on YOUR behalf. Any DOCUMENTS referred to herein shall

13

include those in YOUR possession, custody, or control, as well as all DOCUMENTS in the

14

possession, custody or control of YOUR past and present attorneys, agents, employees, accountants,

15

spouses, financial or tax advisors, or any other persons and/or entities purporting to act on YOUR

16

behalf.

17
18
19

3.

“COMPLAINT” means and refers to YOUR “Consolidated Amended Class Action

Complaint,” filed on or about April 25, 2014, in the ACTION (Dkt. No. 25).
4.

“COMMUNICATION” and “COMMUNICATIONS” include, without limitation, any

20

transmission or transfer of information of any kind, whether orally, electronically, in writing, or in

21

any other manner, at any time or place, and under any circumstances whatsoever.

22

5.

“DOCUMENT” and “DOCUMENTS” have the full meaning ascribed to those terms

23

under Federal Rule 34 and include, without limitation, any and all drafts; COMMUNICATIONS;

24

correspondence; memoranda; records; reports; books; records, reports and/or summaries of personal

25

conversations or interviews; diaries; graphs; charts; diagrams; tables; photographs; recordings; tapes;

26

microfilms; minutes; records, reports and/or summaries of meetings or conferences; records and

27

reports of consultants; press releases; stenographic handwritten or any other notes; work papers;

28

checks, front and back; check vouchers, check stubs or receipts; tape data sheets or data processing
1

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF MATTHEW CAMPBELL
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

cards or discs or any other written, recorded, transcribed, punched, taped, filmed or graphic matter,

2

however produced or reproduced; and any paper or writing of whatever description, including any

3

computer database or information contained in any computer although not yet printed out.

4

“DOCUMENT” and “DOCUMENTS” specifically include all e-mail accounts of YOU and YOUR

5

representatives and/or agents. A draft or nonidentical copy is a separate document within the

6

meaning of this term.

7

6.

“FACEBOOK” refers to Facebook, Inc., the Defendant in this ACTION, and anyone

8

acting on FACEBOOK’s behalf, as well as www.facebook.com and any FACEBOOK mobile

9

application.

10

7.

“FACEBOOK MESSAGES PRODUCT” refers to the FACEBOOK product that

11

YOU allege in the COMPLAINT that YOU used, which allows FACEBOOK users to share content

12

by sending or receiving a message.

13
14
15
16
17

8.

“SOCIAL NETWORKING WEBSITES” refers to all websites that provide users with

a platform to build social networks or social relations with users of the same website.
9.

“EMAIL SERVICES” refers to all online services YOU use to send, receive, and/or

store electronic mail.
10.

“PERSON” or “PERSONS” means an individual, or any public or private organization

18

or entity, including an agency, commission, committee, partnership, joint venture, corporation,

19

association, trust, estate, political subdivision, department, office, or board or any similar entity.

20
21

11.

If YOU are asked to “IDENTIFY” information in response to an Interrogatory, YOUR

response should be complete and include:

22

a.

in the case of an individual, the identification should include the full name

23

(including any maiden name, prior name, “nickname,” or variation in spelling) and present or last

24

known home or business address;

25

b.

in the case of an organization or entity, the identification should include the

26

full name of the organization or entity and the present or last known address(es) of its place(s) of

27

business;

28
2
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF MATTHEW CAMPBELL
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

c.

in the case of DOCUMENTS, the identification should include a complete

2

description setting forth the title (if any), date, author, recipient, general subject matter, present

3

location(s), and present custodian(s);

4

d.

in the case of a transaction, occurrence, or instance of any behavior, the

5

identification should include the date, persons involved, place of occurrence, and a complete

6

description of all DOCUMENTS related thereto; and

7

e.

in the case of a fact (or all facts), the identification should include YOUR basis

8

for asserting that fact, all persons who have discoverable knowledge concerning that fact, and all

9

DOCUMENTS relating to that fact, regardless of whether they support or contradict the fact.

10
11
12

INSTRUCTIONS
1.

The numbered headings in the Interrogatories below are for convenience only and are

not intended or to be read as limiting the scope or meaning of any request for response thereunder.

13

2.

YOU are to answer each Interrogatory separately and as completely as possible.

14

3.

In answering these Interrogatories, furnish all information that is available to YOU,

15

including information in the possession of anyone acting on YOUR behalf, and not merely such

16

information known of YOUR own personal knowledge. If YOU cannot answer the Interrogatories in

17

full after exercising due diligence to secure the information to do so, YOU must answer to the extent

18

possible and explain why YOUR answer is not complete.

19

4.

These Interrogatories should be construed as broadly as possible with all doubts

20

resolved in favor of production. The words “all,” “any,” “each,” “and,” and “or” shall be construed

21

conjunctively or disjunctively as necessary to make the Interrogatories inclusive rather than

22

exclusive. Except as specifically provided in these Interrogatories, words imparting the singular shall

23

include the plural and vice versa, where appropriate. Except as specifically provided in these

24

Interrogatories, words imparting the present tense shall also include the past and future tenses and

25

vice versa, where appropriate.

26

5.

If any response requested by any Interrogatory is withheld under a claim of privilege,

27

YOU must set forth the information necessary for FACEBOOK to ascertain whether the privilege

28

properly applies, including, but not limited to, describing the matter withheld, stating the privilege
3

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF MATTHEW CAMPBELL
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

being relied upon, and identifying all PERSONS (by name, title, address, company (if applicable),

2

and relationship to YOU) who have or have had access to said matter (including but not limited to all

3

the identity(ies) of the author(s) or maker(s), recipient(s), and carbon copy recipient(s)), the

4

applicable date(s), and the subject matter(s) in a privilege log.

5
6
7

6.

If any portion of any response to these Interrogatories is withheld under a claim of

privilege, any non-privileged portion of such response must be produced.
7.

If the answer to any Interrogatory is that YOU lack knowledge of some or all of the

8

requested information, describe all efforts made by YOU to obtain the information necessary to

9

answer the Interrogatory.

10

8.

The fact that YOUR investigation is continuing or that discovery is not complete does

11

not excuse YOU from answering each Interrogatory based on the knowledge YOU currently have.

12

However, if YOUR investigation is continuing or discovery is not complete with respect to the matter

13

inquired into, please state as much in YOUR answer.

14

9.

Whenever an Interrogatory may be answered by referring to a DOCUMENT, the

15

DOCUMENT should be attached as an exhibit to the response and referred to in YOUR response. If

16

the DOCUMENT has more than one page, please refer to the page and section where the answer to

17

the Interrogatory can be found.

18
19
20
21
22

10.

YOUR response to each Interrogatory shall identify each individual who supplied

information for, or participated or assisted in, the preparation of YOUR response.
11.

If YOU object to a portion of any Interrogatory, then YOU should answer any portion

of the Interrogatory to which YOU have no objection.
12.

If YOU conclude that any Interrogatory, Definition, or Instruction is ambiguous, then

23

state in YOUR answer the matter deemed ambiguous and the construction YOU employed in

24

answering the Interrogatory.

25

13.

Interrogatories calling for numerical or chronological information shall be deemed, to

26

the extent that precise figures or dates are not known, to call for estimates. In each instance that an

27

estimate is given, it should be identified as such together with the source of information underlying

28

the estimate.
4

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF MATTHEW CAMPBELL
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

14.

These Interrogatories are to be regarded as continuing pursuant to Rule 26(e) of the

2

Federal Rules. YOU are required to provide, by way of supplementary responses hereto, such

3

additional information as may be obtained by YOU or any PERSON acting on YOUR behalf that will

4

augment or modify YOUR answers now given to the following Interrogatories. Pursuant to Rule

5

26(e) of the Federal Rules, YOU are required to supplement these responses without a specific

6

request from FACEBOOK.

7
8
9

INTERROGATORIES
INTERROGATORY NO. 1
IDENTIFY all FACEBOOK accounts YOU have ever established or used, including, for each

10

account: (a) YOUR username; (b) the name YOU provided to FACEBOOK in setting up the

11

account; (c) the e-mail address that YOU associated with the account; (d) the mobile telephone

12

number(s) that YOU associated with the account; (e) the date YOUR account was established; and

13

(f) the date YOUR account was disabled, suspended, or deleted (if applicable).

14

INTERROGATORY NO. 2

15

IDENTIFY all facts regarding all messages YOU have sent or received via the FACEBOOK

16

MESSAGES PRODUCT, including, for each message: (a) the date the message was sent; (b) the

17

author of the message; (c) the recipient(s) of the message; (d) the physical location (city and state)

18

where the author was located when the message was sent (or, if unknown, the author’s state of

19

residence); (e) the physical location (city and state) where the recipient(s) was located when the

20

message was received (or, if unknown, the recipient’s state of residence); (f) if a URL was included

21

in the message, the name of the URL(s); (g) if a URL was included in the message, whether a

22

“preview” of the website associated with the URL was contained in the message (if known); and

23

(h) if a URL was included in the message, whether the website associated with the URL contained a

24

FACEBOOK social plugin at the time the message was sent (if known).

25

INTERROGATORY NO. 3

26
27

IDENTIFY all PERSONS YOU have sent messages to or received messages from via the
FACEBOOK MESSAGES PRODUCT, including each PERSON’S name, address, and FACEBOOK

28
5
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF MATTHEW CAMPBELL
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

account username, or if the PERSON was not a FACEBOOK user, the PERSON’s mobile telephone

2

number and/or email address from which a message was received or to which a message was sent.

3

INTERROGATORY NO. 4

4

IDENTIFY all facts regarding all EMAIL SERVICES and SOCIAL NETWORKING

5

WEBSITES, including but not limited to applications offered within those SOCIAL NETWORKING

6

WEBSITES, that YOU have used, including, for each, YOUR e-mail address and/or username and

7

the duration (time period) of YOUR use.

8

INTERROGATORY NO. 5

9

IDENTIFY all facts regarding how and when YOU first became aware of FACEBOOK’s

10

alleged conduct referenced in YOUR COMPLAINT.

11

INTERROGATORY NO. 6

12

IDENTIFY all facts that support YOUR claim that YOU, other Plaintiffs in this ACTION,

13

and/or putative class members suffered harm and/or damage as a result of YOUR use of the

14

FACEBOOK MESSAGES PRODUCT, including but not limited to IDENTIFYING all facts

15

describing how YOU, Plaintiffs, and/or putative class members were harmed.

16

INTERROGATORY NO. 7

17

Separately for YOURSELF and the putative class, IDENTIFY all facts regarding the damages

18

and/or all other monetary relief that YOU and the putative class claim in this ACTION.

19

INTERROGATORY NO. 8

20

IDENTIFY all facts regarding all putative class action proceedings in which YOU have been

21

involved, including but not limited to YOUR role in the proceeding (plaintiff, defendant, witness),

22

the claims and defenses raised in each proceeding, the court or other tribunal in which the proceeding

23

occurred, the judicial officer or arbitrator(s) who presided over the proceeding, the case number, the

24

parties to the proceeding, a summary of the testimony and/or DOCUMENTS YOU provided (if any),

25

an identification of YOUR counsel for each proceeding, and the disposition and relief awarded.

26

INTERROGATORY NO. 9

27
28

IDENTIFY all facts regarding the exact practices by FACEBOOK that YOU contend violate
California and/or federal law.
6

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF MATTHEW CAMPBELL
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1
2

INTERROGATORY NO. 10
Do YOU contend that the scanning of FACEBOOK messages for any purpose violates federal

3

law and/or California law?

4

INTERROGATORY NO. 11

5

If YOUR response to Interrogatory No. 10 is anything other than an unqualified “no,”

6

IDENTIFY all facts supporting YOUR response.

7

INTERROGATORY NO. 12

8
9
10
11

Do YOU contend that the scanning of FACEBOOK messages for the purpose of increasing
the “Like” count violates federal law and/or California law?
INTERROGATORY NO. 13
If YOUR response to Interrogatory No. 12 is anything other than an unqualified “no,”

12

IDENTIFY all facts supporting YOUR response.

13

DATED: January 26, 2015

14

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
By:

/s/
Joshua A. Jessen

15
16

Attorneys for Defendant FACEBOOK, INC.

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
7
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF MATTHEW CAMPBELL
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

PROOF OF SERVICE

2
3
4

I, Jeana Bisnar Maute, declare as follows:
I am employed in the County of Santa Clara, State of California, I am over the age of eighteen
years and am not a party to this action; my business address is 1881 Page Mill Road, Palo Alto, CA
94304-1211, in said County and State. On January 26, 2015, I served the following document(s):

5
6
7

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO
PLAINTIFF MATTHEW CAMPBELL
on the parties stated below, by the following means of service:
David F. Slade
[e-mail]
James Allen Carney
[e-mail]
Joseph Henry Bates, III
Carney Bates & Pulliam, PLLC
[e-mail]

8
9
10
11

Jeremy A. Lieberman
Pomerantz Grossman Hufford Dahlstrom & Gross LLP
[e-mail]

12
13

Melissa Ann Gardner
[e-mail]
Nicholas Diamand
[e-mail]
Rachel Geman
[e-mail]
Michael W. Sobol
Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP
[e-mail]

14
15
16
17
18

Jon A Tostrud
Tostrud Law Group, P.C.
[e-mail]

19
20

Lionel Z. Glancy
Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP
[e-mail]

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28



BY UNITED STATES MAIL: I placed a true copy in a sealed envelope or package addressed
to the persons as indicated above, on the above-mentioned date, and placed the envelope for
collection and mailing, following our ordinary business practices. I am readily familiar with this
firm's practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing. On the same day that
correspondence is placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited with the U.S. Postal Service
in the ordinary course of business in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid. I am aware
that on motion of party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage
meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing set forth in this declaration.
I am a resident or employed in the county where the mailing occurred. The envelope or package
was placed in the mail at Palo Alto, California.
8

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF MATTHEW CAMPBELL
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1



BY MESSENGER SERVICE: I placed a true copy in a sealed envelope or package addressed
to the persons at the addresses listed above and providing them to a professional messenger
service for service for delivery before 5:00 p.m. on the above-mentioned date. (A declaration by
the messenger must accompany this Proof of Service.)



BY FAX TRANSMISSION: Based on an agreement of the parties to accept service by fax
transmission, I faxed the documents to the persons at the fax numbers listed above
at
[a.m./p.m.] , on January 26, 2015. The telephone number of the sending fax machine
is [number] No error was reported by the fax machine that I used. A copy of the record of the fax
transmission, which I printed out, is attached. This transmission report was properly issue by the
sending fax machine.



BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY: On the above-mentioned date, I enclosed the documents in an
envelope or package provided by an overnight delivery carrier and addressed to the persons at
the addresses shown above. I placed the envelope or package for collection and overnight
delivery at an office or a regularly utilized drop box of the overnight delivery carrier with
delivery fees paid or provided for.



BY LEXISNEXIS: I provided the document(s) listed above electronically to LexisNexis
through the LexisNexis File & Serve website pursuant to the order authorizing electronic service
and the instructions on that website.



BY ELECTRONIC TRANSFER TO THE CM/ECF SYSTEM: On this date, I electronically
uploaded a true and correct copy in Adobe “pdf” format the above-listed document(s) to the
United States District Court’s Case Management and Electronic Case Filing (CM/ECF) system.
After the electronic filing of a document, service is deemed complete upon receipt of the Notice
of Electronic Filing (“NEF”) by the registered CM/ECF users.



BY ELECTRONIC SERVICE: On the above-mentioned date, based on a court order or an
agreement of the parties to accept service by electronic transmission, I caused the documents to
be sent to the persons at the electronic notification addresses as shown above.



(STATE)



(FEDERAL) I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that
the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on January 26, 2015.

21

/s/
Jeana Bisnar Maute

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
9
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF MATTHEW CAMPBELL
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
JOSHUA A. JESSEN, SBN 222831
[e-mail]
JEANA BISNAR MAUTE, SBN 290573
[e-mail]
ASHLEY M. ROGERS, SBN 286252
[e-mail]
1881 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, California 94304
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
GAIL E. LEES, SBN 90363
[e-mail]
CHRISTOPHER CHORBA, SBN 216692
[e-mail]
333 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, California 90071
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
FACEBOOK, INC.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15
16
17

OAKLAND DIVISION
MATTHEW CAMPBELL, MICHAEL
HURLEY, and DAVID SHADPOUR,

18
19
20

Case No. C 13-05996 PJH
CONSOLIDATED CLASS ACTION

Plaintiffs,

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST
SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO
PLAINTIFF MICHAEL HURLEY

v.
FACEBOOK, INC.,

21

Defendant.

22
23

PROPOUNDING PARTY:

FACEBOOK, INC.

24

RESPONDING PARTY:

MICHAEL HURLEY

25

SET NO.

ONE (1)

26
27
28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF MICHAEL HURLEY
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26 and 33 (the “Federal Rules”), Defendant

2

Facebook, Inc., by and through its undersigned counsel, hereby propounds the following first set of

3

interrogatories (“Interrogatories”) on Plaintiff Michael Hurley to be answered separately and under

4

oath, within thirty (30) days after service hereof. For purposes of these Interrogatories, the following

5

definitions and instructions shall apply:

6
7

DEFINITIONS
1.

“ACTION” means and refers to the above-captioned lawsuit entitled Matthew

8

Campbell et al. v. Facebook, Inc., Case No. C 13-05996 PJH, now pending in the United States

9

District Court for the Northern District of California, and assigned to the Honorable Phyllis J.

10

Hamilton.

11

2.

“YOU,” “YOUR,” and/or “YOURSELF” refers to Michael Hurley, a Plaintiff in the

12

ACTION, and anyone acting on YOUR behalf. Any DOCUMENTS referred to herein shall include

13

those in YOUR possession, custody, or control, as well as all DOCUMENTS in the possession,

14

custody or control of YOUR past and present attorneys, agents, employees, accountants, spouses,

15

financial or tax advisors, or any other persons and/or entities purporting to act on YOUR behalf.

16
17
18

3.

“COMPLAINT” means and refers to YOUR “Consolidated Amended Class Action

Complaint,” filed on or about April 25, 2014, in the ACTION (Dkt. No. 25).
4.

“COMMUNICATION” and “COMMUNICATIONS” include, without limitation, any

19

transmission or transfer of information of any kind, whether orally, electronically, in writing, or in

20

any other manner, at any time or place, and under any circumstances whatsoever.

21

5.

“DOCUMENT” and “DOCUMENTS” have the full meaning ascribed to those terms

22

under Federal Rule 34 and include, without limitation, any and all drafts; COMMUNICATIONS;

23

correspondence; memoranda; records; reports; books; records, reports and/or summaries of personal

24

conversations or interviews; diaries; graphs; charts; diagrams; tables; photographs; recordings; tapes;

25

microfilms; minutes; records, reports and/or summaries of meetings or conferences; records and

26

reports of consultants; press releases; stenographic handwritten or any other notes; work papers;

27

checks, front and back; check vouchers, check stubs or receipts; tape data sheets or data processing

28

cards or discs or any other written, recorded, transcribed, punched, taped, filmed or graphic matter,
1

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF MICHAEL HURLEY
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

however produced or reproduced; and any paper or writing of whatever description, including any

2

computer database or information contained in any computer although not yet printed out.

3

“DOCUMENT” and “DOCUMENTS” specifically include all e-mail accounts of YOU and YOUR

4

representatives and/or agents. A draft or nonidentical copy is a separate document within the

5

meaning of this term.

6

6.

“FACEBOOK” refers to Facebook, Inc., the Defendant in this ACTION, and anyone

7

acting on FACEBOOK’s behalf, as well as www.facebook.com and any FACEBOOK mobile

8

application.

9

7.

“FACEBOOK MESSAGES PRODUCT” refers to the FACEBOOK product that

10

YOU allege in the COMPLAINT that YOU used, which allows FACEBOOK users to share content

11

by sending or receiving a message.

12
13
14
15
16

8.

“SOCIAL NETWORKING WEBSITES” refers to all websites that provide users with

a platform to build social networks or social relations with users of the same website.
9.

“EMAIL SERVICES” refers to all online services YOU use to send, receive, and/or

store electronic mail.
10.

“PERSON” or “PERSONS” means an individual, or any public or private organization

17

or entity, including an agency, commission, committee, partnership, joint venture, corporation,

18

association, trust, estate, political subdivision, department, office, or board or any similar entity.

19
20

11.

If YOU are asked to “IDENTIFY” information in response to an Interrogatory, YOUR

response should be complete and include:

21

a.

in the case of an individual, the identification should include the full name

22

(including any maiden name, prior name, “nickname,” or variation in spelling) and present or last

23

known home or business address;

24

b.

in the case of an organization or entity, the identification should include the

25

full name of the organization or entity and the present or last known address(es) of its place(s) of

26

business;

27
28
2
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF MICHAEL HURLEY
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

c.

in the case of DOCUMENTS, the identification should include a complete

2

description setting forth the title (if any), date, author, recipient, general subject matter, present

3

location(s), and present custodian(s);

4

d.

in the case of a transaction, occurrence, or instance of any behavior, the

5

identification should include the date, persons involved, place of occurrence, and a complete

6

description of all DOCUMENTS related thereto; and

7

e.

in the case of a fact (or all facts), the identification should include YOUR basis

8

for asserting that fact, all persons who have discoverable knowledge concerning that fact, and all

9

DOCUMENTS relating to that fact, regardless of whether they support or contradict the fact.

10
11
12

INSTRUCTIONS
1.

The numbered headings in the Interrogatories below are for convenience only and are

not intended or to be read as limiting the scope or meaning of any request for response thereunder.

13

2.

YOU are to answer each Interrogatory separately and as completely as possible.

14

3.

In answering these Interrogatories, furnish all information that is available to YOU,

15

including information in the possession of anyone acting on YOUR behalf, and not merely such

16

information known of YOUR own personal knowledge. If YOU cannot answer the Interrogatories in

17

full after exercising due diligence to secure the information to do so, YOU must answer to the extent

18

possible and explain why YOUR answer is not complete.

19

4.

These Interrogatories should be construed as broadly as possible with all doubts

20

resolved in favor of production. The words “all,” “any,” “each,” “and,” and “or” shall be construed

21

conjunctively or disjunctively as necessary to make the Interrogatories inclusive rather than

22

exclusive. Except as specifically provided in these Interrogatories, words imparting the singular shall

23

include the plural and vice versa, where appropriate. Except as specifically provided in these

24

Interrogatories, words imparting the present tense shall also include the past and future tenses and

25

vice versa, where appropriate.

26

5.

If any response requested by any Interrogatory is withheld under a claim of privilege,

27

YOU must set forth the information necessary for FACEBOOK to ascertain whether the privilege

28

properly applies, including, but not limited to, describing the matter withheld, stating the privilege
3

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF MICHAEL HURLEY
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

being relied upon, and identifying all PERSONS (by name, title, address, company (if applicable),

2

and relationship to YOU) who have or have had access to said matter (including but not limited to all

3

the identity(ies) of the author(s) or maker(s), recipient(s), and carbon copy recipient(s)), the

4

applicable date(s), and the subject matter(s) in a privilege log.

5
6
7

6.

If any portion of any response to these Interrogatories is withheld under a claim of

privilege, any non-privileged portion of such response must be produced.
7.

If the answer to any Interrogatory is that YOU lack knowledge of some or all of the

8

requested information, describe all efforts made by YOU to obtain the information necessary to

9

answer the Interrogatory.

10

8.

The fact that YOUR investigation is continuing or that discovery is not complete does

11

not excuse YOU from answering each Interrogatory based on the knowledge YOU currently have.

12

However, if YOUR investigation is continuing or discovery is not complete with respect to the matter

13

inquired into, please state as much in YOUR answer.

14

9.

Whenever an Interrogatory may be answered by referring to a DOCUMENT, the

15

DOCUMENT should be attached as an exhibit to the response and referred to in YOUR response. If

16

the DOCUMENT has more than one page, please refer to the page and section where the answer to

17

the Interrogatory can be found.

18
19
20
21
22

10.

YOUR response to each Interrogatory shall identify each individual who supplied

information for, or participated or assisted in, the preparation of YOUR response.
11.

If YOU object to a portion of any Interrogatory, then YOU should answer any portion

of the Interrogatory to which YOU have no objection.
12.

If YOU conclude that any Interrogatory, Definition, or Instruction is ambiguous, then

23

state in YOUR answer the matter deemed ambiguous and the construction YOU employed in

24

answering the Interrogatory.

25

13.

Interrogatories calling for numerical or chronological information shall be deemed, to

26

the extent that precise figures or dates are not known, to call for estimates. In each instance that an

27

estimate is given, it should be identified as such together with the source of information underlying

28

the estimate.
4

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF MICHAEL HURLEY
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

14.

These Interrogatories are to be regarded as continuing pursuant to Rule 26(e) of the

2

Federal Rules. YOU are required to provide, by way of supplementary responses hereto, such

3

additional information as may be obtained by YOU or any PERSON acting on YOUR behalf that will

4

augment or modify YOUR answers now given to the following Interrogatories. Pursuant to Rule

5

26(e) of the Federal Rules, YOU are required to supplement these responses without a specific

6

request from FACEBOOK.

7
8
9

INTERROGATORIES
INTERROGATORY NO. 1
IDENTIFY all FACEBOOK accounts YOU have ever established or used, including, for each

10

account: (a) YOUR username; (b) the name YOU provided to FACEBOOK in setting up the

11

account; (c) the e-mail address that YOU associated with the account; (d) the mobile telephone

12

number(s) that YOU associated with the account; (e) the date YOUR account was established; and

13

(f) the date YOUR account was disabled, suspended, or deleted (if applicable).

14

INTERROGATORY NO. 2

15

IDENTIFY all facts regarding all messages YOU have sent or received via the FACEBOOK

16

MESSAGES PRODUCT, including, for each message: (a) the date the message was sent; (b) the

17

author of the message; (c) the recipient(s) of the message; (d) the physical location (city and state)

18

where the author was located when the message was sent (or, if unknown, the author’s state of

19

residence); (e) the physical location (city and state) where the recipient(s) was located when the

20

message was received (or, if unknown, the recipient’s state of residence); (f) if a URL was included

21

in the message, the name of the URL(s); (g) if a URL was included in the message, whether a

22

“preview” of the website associated with the URL was contained in the message (if known); and

23

(h) if a URL was included in the message, whether the website associated with the URL contained a

24

FACEBOOK social plugin at the time the message was sent (if known).

25

INTERROGATORY NO. 3

26
27

IDENTIFY all PERSONS YOU have sent messages to or received messages from via the
FACEBOOK MESSAGES PRODUCT, including each PERSON’S name, address, and FACEBOOK

28
5
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF MICHAEL HURLEY
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

account username, or if the PERSON was not a FACEBOOK user, the PERSON’s mobile telephone

2

number and/or email address from which a message was received or to which a message was sent.

3

INTERROGATORY NO. 4

4

IDENTIFY all facts regarding all EMAIL SERVICES and SOCIAL NETWORKING

5

WEBSITES, including but not limited to applications offered within those SOCIAL NETWORKING

6

WEBSITES, that YOU have used, including, for each, YOUR e-mail address and/or username and

7

the duration (time period) of YOUR use.

8

INTERROGATORY NO. 5

9

IDENTIFY all facts regarding how and when YOU first became aware of FACEBOOK’s

10

alleged conduct referenced in YOUR COMPLAINT.

11

INTERROGATORY NO. 6

12

IDENTIFY all facts that support YOUR claim that YOU, other Plaintiffs in this ACTION,

13

and/or putative class members suffered harm and/or damage as a result of YOUR use of the

14

FACEBOOK MESSAGES PRODUCT, including but not limited to IDENTIFYING all facts

15

describing how YOU, Plaintiffs, and/or putative class members were harmed.

16

INTERROGATORY NO. 7

17

Separately for YOURSELF and the putative class, IDENTIFY all facts regarding the damages

18

and/or all other monetary relief that YOU and the putative class claim in this ACTION.

19

INTERROGATORY NO. 8

20

IDENTIFY all facts regarding all putative class action proceedings in which YOU have been

21

involved, including but not limited to YOUR role in the proceeding (plaintiff, defendant, witness),

22

the claims and defenses raised in each proceeding, the court or other tribunal in which the proceeding

23

occurred, the judicial officer or arbitrator(s) who presided over the proceeding, the case number, the

24

parties to the proceeding, a summary of the testimony and/or DOCUMENTS YOU provided (if any),

25

an identification of YOUR counsel for each proceeding, and the disposition and relief awarded.

26

INTERROGATORY NO. 9

27
28

Do YOU contend that the scanning of FACEBOOK messages for the purpose of developing
user profiles to support and deliver targeted advertising violates federal law and/or California law?
6

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF MICHAEL HURLEY
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1
2

INTERROGATORY NO. 10
If YOUR response to Interrogatory No. 9 is anything other than an unqualified “no,”

3

IDENTIFY all facts supporting YOUR response.

4

INTERROGATORY NO. 11

5

IDENTIFY all facts that support YOUR allegation in paragraph 3 of YOUR COMPLAINT

6

that “Facebook primarily generates revenue from targeted advertising and the fundamental means of

7

amassing the user data needed for effective targeted advertising is through Facebook’s ‘Like’

8

function.”

9

INTERROGATORY NO. 12

10

IDENTIFY all facts that support YOUR allegation in paragraph 25 of YOUR COMPLAINT

11

that “whenever a private message contains a URL, Facebook uses a software application called a

12

‘web crawler’ to scan the URL, sending HTTP requests to the server associated with the URL and

13

then seeking various items of information about the web page to which the URL is linked.”

14

DATED: January 26, 2015

15

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
By:

/s/
Joshua A. Jessen

16
17

Attorneys for Defendant FACEBOOK, INC.

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
7
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF MICHAEL HURLEY
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

PROOF OF SERVICE

2
3
4

I, Jeana Bisnar Maute, declare as follows:
I am employed in the County of Santa Clara, State of California, I am over the age of eighteen
years and am not a party to this action; my business address is 1881 Page Mill Road, Palo Alto, CA
94304-1211, in said County and State. On January 26, 2015, I served the following document(s):

5
6
7

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO
PLAINTIFF MICHAEL HURLEY
on the parties stated below, by the following means of service:
David F. Slade
[e-mail]
James Allen Carney
[e-mail]
Joseph Henry Bates, III
Carney Bates & Pulliam, PLLC
[e-mail]

8
9
10
11

Jeremy A. Lieberman
Pomerantz Grossman Hufford Dahlstrom & Gross LLP
[e-mail]

12
13

Melissa Ann Gardner
[e-mail]
Nicholas Diamand
[e-mail]
Rachel Geman
[e-mail]
Michael W. Sobol
Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP
[e-mail]

14
15
16
17
18

Jon A Tostrud
Tostrud Law Group, P.C.
[e-mail]

19
20

Lionel Z. Glancy
Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP
[e-mail]

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28



BY UNITED STATES MAIL: I placed a true copy in a sealed envelope or package addressed
to the persons as indicated above, on the above-mentioned date, and placed the envelope for
collection and mailing, following our ordinary business practices. I am readily familiar with this
firm's practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing. On the same day that
correspondence is placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited with the U.S. Postal Service
in the ordinary course of business in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid. I am aware
that on motion of party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage
meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing set forth in this declaration.
I am a resident or employed in the county where the mailing occurred. The envelope or package
was placed in the mail at Palo Alto, California.
8

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF MICHAEL HURLEY
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1



BY MESSENGER SERVICE: I placed a true copy in a sealed envelope or package addressed
to the persons at the addresses listed above and providing them to a professional messenger
service for service for delivery before 5:00 p.m. on the above-mentioned date. (A declaration by
the messenger must accompany this Proof of Service.)



BY FAX TRANSMISSION: Based on an agreement of the parties to accept service by fax
transmission, I faxed the documents to the persons at the fax numbers listed above
at
[a.m./p.m.] , on January 26, 2015. The telephone number of the sending fax machine
is [number] No error was reported by the fax machine that I used. A copy of the record of the fax
transmission, which I printed out, is attached. This transmission report was properly issue by the
sending fax machine.



BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY: On the above-mentioned date, I enclosed the documents in an
envelope or package provided by an overnight delivery carrier and addressed to the persons at
the addresses shown above. I placed the envelope or package for collection and overnight
delivery at an office or a regularly utilized drop box of the overnight delivery carrier with
delivery fees paid or provided for.



BY LEXISNEXIS: I provided the document(s) listed above electronically to LexisNexis
through the LexisNexis File & Serve website pursuant to the order authorizing electronic service
and the instructions on that website.



BY ELECTRONIC TRANSFER TO THE CM/ECF SYSTEM: On this date, I electronically
uploaded a true and correct copy in Adobe “pdf” format the above-listed document(s) to the
United States District Court’s Case Management and Electronic Case Filing (CM/ECF) system.
After the electronic filing of a document, service is deemed complete upon receipt of the Notice
of Electronic Filing (“NEF”) by the registered CM/ECF users.



BY ELECTRONIC SERVICE: On the above-mentioned date, based on a court order or an
agreement of the parties to accept service by electronic transmission, I caused the documents to
be sent to the persons at the electronic notification addresses as shown above.



(STATE)



(FEDERAL) I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that
the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on January 26, 2015.

21

/s/
Jeana Bisnar Maute

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
9
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF MICHAEL HURLEY
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
JOSHUA A. JESSEN, SBN 222831
[e-mail]
JEANA BISNAR MAUTE, SBN 290573
[e-mail]
ASHLEY M. ROGERS, SBN 286252
[e-mail]
1881 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, California 94304
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
GAIL E. LEES, SBN 90363
[e-mail]
CHRISTOPHER CHORBA, SBN 216692
[e-mail]
333 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, California 90071
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
FACEBOOK, INC.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15
16
17

OAKLAND DIVISION
MATTHEW CAMPBELL, MICHAEL
HURLEY, and DAVID SHADPOUR,

18
19
20

Case No. C 13-05996 PJH
CONSOLIDATED CLASS ACTION

Plaintiffs,

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST
SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO
PLAINTIFF DAVID SHADPOUR

v.
FACEBOOK, INC.,

21

Defendant.

22
23

PROPOUNDING PARTY:

FACEBOOK, INC.

24

RESPONDING PARTY:

DAVID SHADPOUR

25

SET NO.

ONE (1)

26
27
28
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF DAVID SHADPOUR
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26 and 33 (the “Federal Rules”), Defendant

2

Facebook, Inc., by and through its undersigned counsel, hereby propounds the following first set of

3

interrogatories (“Interrogatories”) on Plaintiff David Shadpour to be answered separately and under

4

oath, within thirty (30) days after service hereof. For purposes of these Interrogatories, the following

5

definitions and instructions shall apply:

6
7

DEFINITIONS
1.

“ACTION” means and refers to the above-captioned lawsuit entitled Matthew

8

Campbell et al. v. Facebook, Inc., Case No. C 13-05996 PJH, now pending in the United States

9

District Court for the Northern District of California, and assigned to the Honorable Phyllis J.

10

Hamilton.

11

2.

“YOU,” “YOUR,” and/or “YOURSELF” refers to David Shadpour, a Plaintiff in the

12

ACTION, and anyone acting on YOUR behalf. Any DOCUMENTS referred to herein shall include

13

those in YOUR possession, custody, or control, as well as all DOCUMENTS in the possession,

14

custody or control of YOUR past and present attorneys, agents, employees, accountants, spouses,

15

financial or tax advisors, or any other persons and/or entities purporting to act on YOUR behalf.

16
17
18

3.

“COMPLAINT” means and refers to YOUR “Consolidated Amended Class Action

Complaint,” filed on or about April 25, 2014, in the ACTION (Dkt. No. 25).
4.

“COMMUNICATION” and “COMMUNICATIONS” include, without limitation, any

19

transmission or transfer of information of any kind, whether orally, electronically, in writing, or in

20

any other manner, at any time or place, and under any circumstances whatsoever.

21

5.

“DOCUMENT” and “DOCUMENTS” have the full meaning ascribed to those terms

22

under Federal Rule 34 and include, without limitation, any and all drafts; COMMUNICATIONS;

23

correspondence; memoranda; records; reports; books; records, reports and/or summaries of personal

24

conversations or interviews; diaries; graphs; charts; diagrams; tables; photographs; recordings; tapes;

25

microfilms; minutes; records, reports and/or summaries of meetings or conferences; records and

26

reports of consultants; press releases; stenographic handwritten or any other notes; work papers;

27

checks, front and back; check vouchers, check stubs or receipts; tape data sheets or data processing

28

cards or discs or any other written, recorded, transcribed, punched, taped, filmed or graphic matter,
1

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF DAVID SHADPOUR
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

however produced or reproduced; and any paper or writing of whatever description, including any

2

computer database or information contained in any computer although not yet printed out.

3

“DOCUMENT” and “DOCUMENTS” specifically include all e-mail accounts of YOU and YOUR

4

representatives and/or agents. A draft or nonidentical copy is a separate document within the

5

meaning of this term.

6

6.

“FACEBOOK” refers to Facebook, Inc., the Defendant in this ACTION, and anyone

7

acting on FACEBOOK’s behalf, as well as www.facebook.com and any FACEBOOK mobile

8

application.

9

7.

“FACEBOOK MESSAGES PRODUCT” refers to the FACEBOOK product that

10

YOU allege in the COMPLAINT that YOU used, which allows FACEBOOK users to share content

11

by sending or receiving a message.

12
13
14
15
16

8.

“SOCIAL NETWORKING WEBSITES” refers to all websites that provide users with

a platform to build social networks or social relations with users of the same website.
9.

“EMAIL SERVICES” refers to all online services YOU use to send, receive, and/or

store electronic mail.
10.

“PERSON” or “PERSONS” means an individual, or any public or private organization

17

or entity, including an agency, commission, committee, partnership, joint venture, corporation,

18

association, trust, estate, political subdivision, department, office, or board or any similar entity.

19
20

11.

If YOU are asked to “IDENTIFY” information in response to an Interrogatory, YOUR

response should be complete and include:

21

a.

in the case of an individual, the identification should include the full name

22

(including any maiden name, prior name, “nickname,” or variation in spelling) and present or last

23

known home or business address;

24

b.

in the case of an organization or entity, the identification should include the

25

full name of the organization or entity and the present or last known address(es) of its place(s) of

26

business;

27
28
2
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF DAVID SHADPOUR
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

c.

in the case of DOCUMENTS, the identification should include a complete

2

description setting forth the title (if any), date, author, recipient, general subject matter, present

3

location(s), and present custodian(s);

4

d.

in the case of a transaction, occurrence, or instance of any behavior, the

5

identification should include the date, persons involved, place of occurrence, and a complete

6

description of all DOCUMENTS related thereto; and

7

e.

in the case of a fact (or all facts), the identification should include YOUR basis

8

for asserting that fact, all persons who have discoverable knowledge concerning that fact, and all

9

DOCUMENTS relating to that fact, regardless of whether they support or contradict the fact.

10
11
12

INSTRUCTIONS
1.

The numbered headings in the Interrogatories below are for convenience only and are

not intended or to be read as limiting the scope or meaning of any request for response thereunder.

13

2.

YOU are to answer each Interrogatory separately and as completely as possible.

14

3.

In answering these Interrogatories, furnish all information that is available to YOU,

15

including information in the possession of anyone acting on YOUR behalf, and not merely such

16

information known of YOUR own personal knowledge. If YOU cannot answer the Interrogatories in

17

full after exercising due diligence to secure the information to do so, YOU must answer to the extent

18

possible and explain why YOUR answer is not complete.

19

4.

These Interrogatories should be construed as broadly as possible with all doubts

20

resolved in favor of production. The words “all,” “any,” “each,” “and,” and “or” shall be construed

21

conjunctively or disjunctively as necessary to make the Interrogatories inclusive rather than

22

exclusive. Except as specifically provided in these Interrogatories, words imparting the singular shall

23

include the plural and vice versa, where appropriate. Except as specifically provided in these

24

Interrogatories, words imparting the present tense shall also include the past and future tenses and

25

vice versa, where appropriate.

26

5.

If any response requested by any Interrogatory is withheld under a claim of privilege,

27

YOU must set forth the information necessary for FACEBOOK to ascertain whether the privilege

28

properly applies, including, but not limited to, describing the matter withheld, stating the privilege
3

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF DAVID SHADPOUR
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

being relied upon, and identifying all PERSONS (by name, title, address, company (if applicable),

2

and relationship to YOU) who have or have had access to said matter (including but not limited to all

3

the identity(ies) of the author(s) or maker(s), recipient(s), and carbon copy recipient(s)), the

4

applicable date(s), and the subject matter(s) in a privilege log.

5
6
7

6.

If any portion of any response to these Interrogatories is withheld under a claim of

privilege, any non-privileged portion of such response must be produced.
7.

If the answer to any Interrogatory is that YOU lack knowledge of some or all of the

8

requested information, describe all efforts made by YOU to obtain the information necessary to

9

answer the Interrogatory.

10

8.

The fact that YOUR investigation is continuing or that discovery is not complete does

11

not excuse YOU from answering each Interrogatory based on the knowledge YOU currently have.

12

However, if YOUR investigation is continuing or discovery is not complete with respect to the matter

13

inquired into, please state as much in YOUR answer.

14

9.

Whenever an Interrogatory may be answered by referring to a DOCUMENT, the

15

DOCUMENT should be attached as an exhibit to the response and referred to in YOUR response. If

16

the DOCUMENT has more than one page, please refer to the page and section where the answer to

17

the Interrogatory can be found.

18
19
20
21
22

10.

YOUR response to each Interrogatory shall identify each individual who supplied

information for, or participated or assisted in, the preparation of YOUR response.
11.

If YOU object to a portion of any Interrogatory, then YOU should answer any portion

of the Interrogatory to which YOU have no objection.
12.

If YOU conclude that any Interrogatory, Definition, or Instruction is ambiguous, then

23

state in YOUR answer the matter deemed ambiguous and the construction YOU employed in

24

answering the Interrogatory.

25

13.

Interrogatories calling for numerical or chronological information shall be deemed, to

26

the extent that precise figures or dates are not known, to call for estimates. In each instance that an

27

estimate is given, it should be identified as such together with the source of information underlying

28

the estimate.
4

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF DAVID SHADPOUR
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

14.

These Interrogatories are to be regarded as continuing pursuant to Rule 26(e) of the

2

Federal Rules. YOU are required to provide, by way of supplementary responses hereto, such

3

additional information as may be obtained by YOU or any PERSON acting on YOUR behalf that will

4

augment or modify YOUR answers now given to the following Interrogatories. Pursuant to Rule

5

26(e) of the Federal Rules, YOU are required to supplement these responses without a specific

6

request from FACEBOOK.

7
8
9

INTERROGATORIES
INTERROGATORY NO. 1
IDENTIFY all FACEBOOK accounts YOU have ever established or used, including, for each

10

account: (a) YOUR username; (b) the name YOU provided to FACEBOOK in setting up the

11

account; (c) the e-mail address that YOU associated with the account; (d) the mobile telephone

12

number(s) that YOU associated with the account; (e) the date YOUR account was established; and

13

(f) the date YOUR account was disabled, suspended, or deleted (if applicable).

14

INTERROGATORY NO. 2

15

IDENTIFY all facts regarding all messages YOU have sent or received via the FACEBOOK

16

MESSAGES PRODUCT, including, for each message: (a) the date the message was sent; (b) the

17

author of the message; (c) the recipient(s) of the message; (d) the physical location (city and state)

18

where the author was located when the message was sent (or, if unknown, the author’s state of

19

residence); (e) the physical location (city and state) where the recipient(s) was located when the

20

message was received (or, if unknown, the recipient’s state of residence); (f) if a URL was included

21

in the message, the name of the URL(s); (g) if a URL was included in the message, whether a

22

“preview” of the website associated with the URL was contained in the message (if known); and (h)

23

if a URL was included in the message, whether the website associated with the URL contained a

24

FACEBOOK social plugin at the time the message was sent (if known).

25

INTERROGATORY NO. 3

26
27

IDENTIFY all PERSONS YOU have sent messages to or received messages from via the
FACEBOOK MESSAGES PRODUCT, including each PERSON’S name, address, and FACEBOOK

28
5
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF DAVID SHADPOUR
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

account username, or if the PERSON was not a FACEBOOK user, the PERSON’s mobile telephone

2

number and/or email address from which a message was received or to which a message was sent.

3

INTERROGATORY NO. 4

4

IDENTIFY all facts regarding all EMAIL SERVICES and SOCIAL NETWORKING

5

WEBSITES, including but not limited to applications offered within those SOCIAL NETWORKING

6

WEBSITES, that YOU have used, including, for each, YOUR e-mail address and/or username and

7

the duration (time period) of YOUR use.

8

INTERROGATORY NO. 5

9

IDENTIFY all facts regarding how and when YOU first became aware of FACEBOOK’s

10

alleged conduct referenced in YOUR COMPLAINT.

11

INTERROGATORY NO. 6

12

IDENTIFY all facts that support YOUR claim that YOU, other Plaintiffs in this ACTION,

13

and/or putative class members suffered harm and/or damage as a result of YOUR use of the

14

FACEBOOK MESSAGES PRODUCT, including but not limited to IDENTIFYING all facts

15

describing how YOU, Plaintiffs, and/or putative class members were harmed.

16

INTERROGATORY NO. 7

17

Separately for YOURSELF and the putative class, IDENTIFY all facts regarding the damages

18

and/or all other monetary relief that YOU and the putative class claim in this ACTION.

19

INTERROGATORY NO. 8

20

IDENTIFY all facts regarding all putative class action proceedings in which YOU have been

21

involved, including but not limited to YOUR role in the proceeding (plaintiff, defendant, witness),

22

the claims and defenses raised in each proceeding, the court or other tribunal in which the proceeding

23

occurred, the judicial officer or arbitrator(s) who presided over the proceeding, the case number, the

24

parties to the proceeding, a summary of the testimony and/or DOCUMENTS YOU provided (if any),

25

an identification of YOUR counsel for each proceeding, and the disposition and relief awarded.

26

INTERROGATORY NO. 9

27

IDENTIFY all facts supporting YOUR allegation in paragraph 25 of YOUR COMPLAINT

28

that the “interceptions” YOU contend are unlawful occur “in transit, in transmission, and/or during
6

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF DAVID SHADPOUR
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

transfer of users’ private messages.”

2

INTERROGATORY NO. 10

3

IDENTIFY all facts that support YOUR allegations in paragraph 89 of YOUR COMPLAINT

4

that “Facebook’s practice of intercepting, scanning, and generating ‘Likes’ from, users’ private

5

messages, are not necessary for the rendition of Facebook’s private messaging service, the protection

6

of Facebook’s rights or property, or the security of Facebook users,” and “have not be undertaken in

7

the ordinary course of business of an electronic communication service, as described in 28 U.S.C.

8

§ 2510(15).”

9

INTERROGATORY NO. 11

10

IDENTIFY all facts that support YOUR allegations in paragraphs 59−68 of the COMPLAINT

11

that this ACTION is appropriate for class treatment.

12

DATED: January 26, 2015

13

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
By:

/s/
Joshua A. Jessen

14
15

Attorneys for Defendant FACEBOOK, INC.

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
7
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF DAVID SHADPOUR
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1

PROOF OF SERVICE

2
3
4

I, Jeana Bisnar Maute, declare as follows:
I am employed in the County of Santa Clara, State of California, I am over the age of eighteen
years and am not a party to this action; my business address is 1881 Page Mill Road, Palo Alto, CA
94304-1211, in said County and State. On January 26, 2015, I served the following document(s):

5
6
7

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO
PLAINTIFF DAVID SHADPOUR
on the parties stated below, by the following means of service:
David F. Slade
[e-mail]
James Allen Carney
[e-mail]
Joseph Henry Bates, III
Carney Bates & Pulliam, PLLC
[e-mail]

8
9
10
11

Jeremy A. Lieberman
Pomerantz Grossman Hufford Dahlstrom & Gross LLP
[e-mail]

12
13

Melissa Ann Gardner
[e-mail]
Nicholas Diamand
[e-mail]
Rachel Geman
[e-mail]
Michael W. Sobol
Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP
[e-mail]

14
15
16
17
18

Jon A Tostrud
Tostrud Law Group, P.C.
[e-mail]

19
20

Lionel Z. Glancy
Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP
[e-mail]

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28



BY UNITED STATES MAIL: I placed a true copy in a sealed envelope or package addressed
to the persons as indicated above, on the above-mentioned date, and placed the envelope for
collection and mailing, following our ordinary business practices. I am readily familiar with this
firm's practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing. On the same day that
correspondence is placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited with the U.S. Postal Service
in the ordinary course of business in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid. I am aware
that on motion of party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage
meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing set forth in this declaration.
I am a resident or employed in the county where the mailing occurred. The envelope or package
was placed in the mail at Palo Alto, California.
8

Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF DAVID SHADPOUR
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

1



BY MESSENGER SERVICE: I placed a true copy in a sealed envelope or package addressed
to the persons at the addresses listed above and providing them to a professional messenger
service for service for delivery before 5:00 p.m. on the above-mentioned date. (A declaration by
the messenger must accompany this Proof of Service.)



BY FAX TRANSMISSION: Based on an agreement of the parties to accept service by fax
transmission, I faxed the documents to the persons at the fax numbers listed above
at
[a.m./p.m.] , on January 26, 2015. The telephone number of the sending fax machine
is [number] No error was reported by the fax machine that I used. A copy of the record of the fax
transmission, which I printed out, is attached. This transmission report was properly issue by the
sending fax machine.



BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY: On the above-mentioned date, I enclosed the documents in an
envelope or package provided by an overnight delivery carrier and addressed to the persons at
the addresses shown above. I placed the envelope or package for collection and overnight
delivery at an office or a regularly utilized drop box of the overnight delivery carrier with
delivery fees paid or provided for.



BY LEXISNEXIS: I provided the document(s) listed above electronically to LexisNexis
through the LexisNexis File & Serve website pursuant to the order authorizing electronic service
and the instructions on that website.



BY ELECTRONIC TRANSFER TO THE CM/ECF SYSTEM: On this date, I electronically
uploaded a true and correct copy in Adobe “pdf” format the above-listed document(s) to the
United States District Court’s Case Management and Electronic Case Filing (CM/ECF) system.
After the electronic filing of a document, service is deemed complete upon receipt of the Notice
of Electronic Filing (“NEF”) by the registered CM/ECF users.



BY ELECTRONIC SERVICE: On the above-mentioned date, based on a court order or an
agreement of the parties to accept service by electronic transmission, I caused the documents to
be sent to the persons at the electronic notification addresses as shown above.



(STATE)



(FEDERAL) I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that
the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on January 26, 2015.

21

/s/
Jeana Bisnar Maute

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
9
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP

DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF DAVID SHADPOUR
Case No. C 13-05996 PJH

CONFIDENTIAL
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

Michael W. Sobol (State Bar No. 194857)
[e-mail]
David T. Rudolph (State Bar No. 233457)
[e-mail]
Melissa Gardner (State Bar No. 289096)
[e-mail]
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
275 Battery Street, 29th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3339
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415.956.1008
Rachel Geman
[e-mail]
Nicholas Diamand
[e-mail]
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10013-1413
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 212.355.9592

Jeremy A. Lieberman
Lesley F. Portnoy
[e-mail]
POMERANTZ, LLP
600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
New York, New York 10016
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 212.661.8665
Patrick V. Dahlstrom
[e-mail]
POMERANTZ, LLP
10 S. La Salle Street, Suite 3505
Chicago, Illinois 60603
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 312.377.1184

Hank Bates (State Bar No. 167688)
[e-mail]
Allen Carney
[e-mail]
David Slade
[e-mail]
CARNEY BATES & PULLIAM, PLLC
11311 Arcade Drive
Little Rock, AR 72212
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 501.312.8505

18
Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class
19
20

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

21

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

22

OAKLAND DIVISION

23

MATTHEW CAMPBELL, MICHAEL
HURLEY, and DAVID SHADPOUR,

24
Plaintiffs,
25
`

v.

26

Case No. C 13-05996 PJH
PLAINTIFF MATTHEW CAMPBELL’S
CORRECTED OBJECTIONS AND
RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT
FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF
INTERROGATORIES

FACEBOOK, INC.,
27
Defendant.
28
PLAINTIFF CAMPBELL’S
CORRECTED RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS

CONFIDENTIAL
1

PROPOUNDING PARTY:

FACEBOOK, INC.

2

RESPONDING PARTY:

MATTHEW CAMPBELL, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated

SET NO.:

ONE (1)

3
4
5

Pursuant to Rules 26 and 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff Matthew

6

Campbell hereby serves his corrected objections and responses to Defendant Facebook Inc.’s

7

First Set of Interrogatories (“Interrogatories”). These responses are designated “Confidential”

8

under the terms of the draft of the Stipulated Protective Order sent by Plaintiffs to Defendant on

9

March 11, 2015.

10
GENERAL OBJECTIONS

11
12

1.

Plaintiff objects to each of Defendant’s Interrogatories to the extent that they,

13

individually or cumulatively, purport to impose on Plaintiff duties and obligations which exceed,

14

or are different, than those imposed on him by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the Local

15

Rules of the Court.

16

2.

Plaintiff generally objects to each Interrogatory to the extent it purports to seek

17

information covered by the attorney-client privilege, the work product privilege, or any other

18

applicable privilege or immunity. Plaintiff further objects to each Interrogatory to the extent that

19

it seeks information prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial of this or any matter.

20

Plaintiff will provide any information that he believes is non-privileged and is otherwise properly

21

discoverable. By providing such information, Plaintiff does not waive any privileges. To the

22

extent that an Interrogatory may be construed as seeking such privileged or protected information

23

or documents, Plaintiff hereby claims such privilege and invokes such protection. The fact that

24

Plaintiff does not specifically object to an individual Interrogatory on the ground that it seeks

25

such privileged or protected information shall not be deemed a waiver of the protection afforded

26

by the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work product doctrine, or any other applicable

27

privilege or protection.

28
-1-

PLAINTIFF CAMPBELL’S
CORRECTED RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS

CONFIDENTIAL
1
2

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 8:
Plaintiff incorporates and references herein all of the General Objections. Plaintiff further

3

objects that the Interrogatory seeks irrelevant information. Subject to and without waiver of the

4

foregoing objections, Plaintiff states as follows: Plaintiff has not been involved in any other

5

putative class action proceedings.

6

INTERROGATORY NO. 9:

7

IDENTIFY all facts regarding the exact practices by FACEBOOK that YOU contend

8

violate California and/or federal law.

9

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 9:

10

Plaintiff incorporates and references herein all of the General Objections. Plaintiff objects

11

to this Interrogatory as overly broad and unduly burdensome. Plaintiff objects to this

12

Interrogatory on the grounds that it is untimely and premature because discovery in this action is

13

ongoing with substantial discovery yet to occur. Plaintiff objects that Plaintiff has not completed

14

his discovery or investigation of facts relating to this matter, and has not completed preparation

15

for trial, and therefore, this Interrogatory is premature, improper, burdensome, oppressive,

16

harassing, and abusive of the discovery process to the extent that it calls for the disclosure of all

17

facts that support the contentions and allegations in the Complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P.

18

33(a)(2)(“the court may order that [contention interrogatories] need not be answered until

19

designated discovery is complete, or until a pretrial conference or some other time.”). Plaintiff

20

further objects to the extent this Interrogatory purports to seek information covered by the

21

attorney-client privilege or the work product privilege.

22

Subject to and without waiver of the foregoing objections, Plaintiff states as follows:

23

Plaintiff refers to the operative Complaint, which identifies the elements of causes of action under

24

the federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act, and Section 631 of the California Penal

25

Code, respectively, as well as identifies which facts Plaintiff contends establish violations of each

26

element of each of these statutes.

27
28
-9-

PLAINTIFF CAMPBELL’S
CORRECTED RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS

CONFIDENTIAL
1
2

INTERROGATORY NO. 10:
Do YOU contend that the scanning of FACEBOOK messages for any purpose violates

3

federal law and/or California law?

4

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 10:

5

Plaintiff incorporates and references herein all of the General Objections. Plaintiff objects

6

to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is untimely and premature because discovery in this

7

action is ongoing with substantial discovery yet to occur. Plaintiff objects that Plaintiff has not

8

completed his discovery or investigation of facts relating to this matter, and has not completed

9

preparation for trial, and therefore, this Interrogatory is premature, improper, burdensome,

10

oppressive, harassing, and abusive of the discovery process to the extent that it calls for the

11

disclosure of all facts that support the contentions and allegations in the Complaint. See Fed. R.

12

Civ. P. 33(a)(2)(“the court may order that [contention interrogatories] need not be answered until

13

designated discovery is complete, or until a pretrial conference or some other time.”). Subject to

14

and without waiver of the foregoing objections, Plaintiff states as follows: As alleged in the

15

operative Complaint, Facebook’s conduct of scanning Plaintiff’s and the putative class members’

16

messages is a violation of federal and California law.

17

INTERROGATORY NO. 11:

18

If YOUR response to Interrogatory No. 10 is anything other than an unqualified “no,”

19

IDENTIFY all facts supporting YOUR response.

20

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 11:

21

Plaintiff incorporates and references herein all of the General Objections. Plaintiff objects

22

to this Interrogatory as overly broad and unduly burdensome. Plaintiff objects to this

23

Interrogatory on the grounds that it is untimely and premature because discovery in this action is

24

ongoing with substantial discovery yet to occur. Plaintiff objects that Plaintiff has not completed

25

his discovery or investigation of facts relating to this matter, and has not completed preparation

26

for trial, and therefore, this Interrogatory is premature, improper, burdensome, oppressive,

27

harassing, and abusive of the discovery process to the extent that it calls for the disclosure of all

28

facts that support the contentions and allegations in the Complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P.
- 10 -

PLAINTIFF CAMPBELL’S
CORRECTED RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS

CONFIDENTIAL
1

33(a)(2)(“the court may order that [contention interrogatories] need not be answered until

2

designated discovery is complete, or until a pretrial conference or some other time.”). Plaintiff

3

further objects to the extent this Interrogatory purports to seek information covered by the

4

attorney-client privilege or the work product privilege.

5

Subject to and without waiver of the foregoing objections, Plaintiff states as follows:

6

Plaintiff refers to the operative Complaint, which identifies the elements of causes of action under

7

the federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act, and Section 631 of the California Penal

8

Code, respectively, as well as identifies which facts Plaintiff contends establish violations of each

9

element of each of these statutes.

10

INTERROGATORY NO. 12:

11

Do YOU contend that the scanning of FACEBOOK messages for the purpose of

12

increasing the “Like” count violates federal law and/or California law?

13

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 12:

14

Plaintiff incorporates and references herein all of the General Objections. Plaintiff objects

15

to this Interrogatory on the grounds that the term “scanning” is undefined and is therefore vague;

16

the term “increasing the ‘Like’ count” is similarly vague within the context of this

17

Interrogatory. Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is untimely and

18

premature because discovery in this action is ongoing with substantial discovery yet to

19

occur. Plaintiff objects on the grounds that Plaintiff has not completed his discovery or

20

investigation of facts relating to this matter, and has not completed preparation for trial, and

21

therefore, this Interrogatory is premature, improper, burdensome, oppressive, harassing, and

22

abusive of the discovery process to the extent that it calls for the disclosure of all facts that

23

support the contentions and allegations in the Complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(a)(2)(“the court

24

may order that [contention interrogatories] need not be answered until designated discovery is

25

complete, or until a pretrial conference or some other time.”). Subject to and without waiver of

26

the foregoing objections, Plaintiff states as follows: As alleged in the operative Complaint,

27

Facebook’s conduct of scanning Plaintiff’s and the putative class members’ messages is a

28

violation of federal and California law.
- 11 -

PLAINTIFF CAMPBELL’S
CORRECTED RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS

CONFIDENTIAL
1
2

INTERROGATORY NO. 13:
If YOUR response to Interrogatory No. 12 is anything other than an unqualified “no,”

3

IDENTIFY all facts supporting YOUR response.

4

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 13:

5

Plaintiff incorporates and references herein all of the General Objections. Plaintiff objects

6

to this Interrogatory as overly broad and unduly burdensome. Plaintiff objects to this

7

Interrogatory on the grounds that it is untimely and premature because discovery in this action is

8

ongoing with substantial discovery yet to occur. Plaintiff objects that Plaintiff has not completed

9

his discovery or investigation of facts relating to this matter, and has not completed preparation

10

for trial, and therefore, this Interrogatory is premature, improper, burdensome, oppressive,

11

harassing, and abusive of the discovery process to the extent that it calls for the disclosure of all

12

facts that support the contentions and allegations in the Complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P.

13

33(a)(2)(“the court may order that [contention interrogatories] need not be answered until

14

designated discovery is complete, or until a pretrial conference or some other time.”). Plaintiff

15

further objects to the extent this Interrogatory purports to seek information covered by the

16

attorney-client privilege or the work product privilege.

17

Subject to and without waiver of the foregoing objections, Plaintiff states as follows:

18

Plaintiff refers to the operative Complaint, which identifies the elements of causes of action under

19

the federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act, and Section 631 of the California Penal

20

Code, respectively, as well as identifies which facts Plaintiff contends establish violations of each

21

element of each of these statutes.

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 12 -

PLAINTIFF CAMPBELL’S
CORRECTED RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS

CONFIDENTIAL
1

Dated: April 2, 2015

LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

By:

/s/ Michael W. Sobol
Michael W. Sobol

Michael W. Sobol (State Bar No. 194857)
[e-mail]
David T. Rudolph (State Bar No. 233457)
[e-mail]
Melissa Gardner (State Bar No. 289096)
[e-mail]
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
275 Battery Street, 29th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3339
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415.956.1008
Rachel Geman
[e-mail]
Nicholas Diamand
[e-mail]
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10013-1413
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 212.355.9592
Hank Bates (State Bar No. 167688)
[e-mail]
Allen Carney
[e-mail]
David Slade
[e-mail]
CARNEY BATES & PULLIAM, PLLC
11311 Arcade Drive
Little Rock, AR 72212
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 501.312.8505
Jeremy A. Lieberman
[e-mail]
POMERANTZ, LLP
600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 212.661.8665

26
27
28
- 13 -

PLAINTIFF CAMPBELL’S
CORRECTED RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS

CONFIDENTIAL
1
2
3
4
5

Patrick V. Dahlstrom
[e-mail]
POMERANTZ, LLP
10 S. La Salle Street, Suite 3505
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 312.377.1184

8

Jon Tostrud (State Bar No. 199502)
[e-mail]
TOSTRUD LAW GROUP, PC
1925 Century Park East, Suite 2125
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 310.278.2640

9

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class

6
7

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 14 -

PLAINTIFF CAMPBELL’S
CORRECTED RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS

CONFIDENTIAL
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

PROOF OF SERVICE
I am a citizen of the United States and employed in San Francisco County, California. I
am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within-entitled action. My business
address is 275 Battery Street, 29th Floor, San Francisco, California 94111-3339.
I am readily familiar with Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP’s practice for
collection and processing of documents for service via email, and that practice is that the
documents are attached to an email and sent to the recipient’s email account.
I am also readily familiar with this firm’s practice for collection and processing of
correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. Following ordinary business
practices, the envelope was sealed and placed for collection and mailing on this date, and would,
in the ordinary course of business, be deposited with the United States Postal Service on this date.
On April 2, 2015, I caused to be served copies of the following documents:

13
1.

PLAINTIFF MATTHEW CAMPBELL’S CORRECTED
OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT
FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES;
and this

2.

PROOF OF SERVICE BY EMAIL AND U.S. MAIL

14
15
16
17

on Defendant in this action through their counsel:

18
19
20

Christopher Chorba
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
333 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90071-3197
Email: [e-mail]

21
22
23

Joshua Aaron Jessen
Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP
3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 1200
Irvine, CA 92612
Email: [e-mail]

24
25
26

Executed on April 2, 2015, at San Francisco, California.
/s/ Melissa A. Gardner
Melissa A. Gardner

27
28
- 15 -

PLAINTIFF CAMPBELL’S
CORRECTED RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS

CONFIDENTIAL
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

Michael W. Sobol (State Bar No. 194857)
[e-mail]
David T. Rudolph (State Bar No. 233457)
[e-mail]
Melissa Gardner (State Bar No. 289096)
[e-mail]
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
275 Battery Street, 29th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3339
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415.956.1008
Rachel Geman
[e-mail]
Nicholas Diamand
[e-mail]
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10013-1413
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 212.355.9592

Jeremy A. Lieberman
Lesley F. Portnoy
[e-mail]
POMERANTZ, LLP
600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
New York, New York 10016
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 212.661.8665
Patrick V. Dahlstrom
[e-mail]
POMERANTZ, LLP
10 S. La Salle Street, Suite 3505
Chicago, Illinois 60603
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 312.377.1184

Hank Bates (State Bar No. 167688)
[e-mail]
Allen Carney
[e-mail]
David Slade
[e-mail]
CARNEY BATES & PULLIAM, PLLC
11311 Arcade Drive
Little Rock, AR 72212
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 501.312.8505

18
Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class
19
20

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

21

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

22

OAKLAND DIVISION

23

MATTHEW CAMPBELL, MICHAEL
HURLEY, and DAVID SHADPOUR,

24
Plaintiffs,
25
`

v.

Case No. C 13-05996 PJH
PLAINTIFF MICHAEL HURLEY’S
OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO
DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S
FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES

26
FACEBOOK, INC.,
27
Defendant.
28
PLAINTIFF HURLEY’S RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS
CASE NO. C 13-05996 PJH

CONFIDENTIAL
1

PROPOUNDING PARTY:

FACEBOOK, INC.

2

RESPONDING PARTY:

MICHAEL HURLEY, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated

SET NO.:

ONE (1)

3
4
5

Pursuant to Rules 26 and 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff Michael

6

Hurley hereby serves his objections and responses to Defendant Facebook Inc.’s First Set of

7

Interrogatories (“Interrogatories”). These responses are designated “Confidential” under the terms

8

of the draft of the Stipulated Protective Order sent by Plaintiffs to Defendant on March 11, 2015.

9
GENERAL OBJECTIONS

10
11

1.

Plaintiff objects to each of Defendant’s Interrogatories to the extent that they,

12

individually or cumulatively, purport to impose on Plaintiff duties and obligations which exceed,

13

or are different, than those imposed on him by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the Local

14

Rules of the Court.

15

2.

Plaintiff generally objects to each Interrogatory to the extent it purports to seek

16

information covered by the attorney-client privilege, the work product privilege, or any other

17

applicable privilege or immunity. Plaintiff further objects to each Interrogatory to the extent that

18

it seeks information prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial of this or any matter.

19

Plaintiff will provide any information that he believes is non-privileged and is otherwise properly

20

discoverable. By providing such information, Plaintiff does not waive any privileges. To the

21

extent that an Interrogatory may be construed as seeking such privileged or protected information

22

or documents, Plaintiff hereby claims such privilege and invokes such protection. The fact that

23

Plaintiff does not specifically object to an individual Interrogatory on the ground that it seeks

24

such privileged or protected information shall not be deemed a waiver of the protection afforded

25

by the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work product doctrine, or any other applicable

26

privilege or protection.

27
28

3.

Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s counsel have not completed their investigation of the facts

related to this case and have not completed their preparation for trial. Thus, the following
-1-

PLAINTIFF HURLEY’S RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS
CASE NO. C 13-05996 PJH

CONFIDENTIAL
1

INTERROGATORY NO. 9:

2

Do YOU contend that the scanning of FACEBOOK messages for the purpose of

3

developing user profiles to support and deliver targeted advertising violates federal law and/or

4

California law?

5

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 9:

6

Plaintiff incorporates and references herein all of the General Objections. Plaintiff objects

7

to this Interrogatory on the grounds that the term “scanning” is undefined and is therefore vague;

8

the terms “user profiles” and “targeted advertising” are similarly vague within the context of this

9

Interrogatory. Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is untimely and

10

premature because discovery in this action is ongoing with substantial discovery yet to occur.

11

Plaintiff objects that Plaintiff has not completed his discovery or investigation of facts relating to

12

this matter, and has not completed preparation for trial, and therefore, this Interrogatory is

13

premature, improper, burdensome, oppressive, harassing, and abusive of the discovery process to

14

the extent that it calls for the disclosure of all facts that support the contentions and allegations in

15

the Complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(a)(2)(“the court may order that [contention interrogatories]

16

need not be answered until designated discovery is complete, or until a pretrial conference or

17

some other time.”). Subject to and without waiver of the foregoing objections, Plaintiff states as

18

follows: As alleged in the operative Complaint, Facebook’s conduct of scanning Plaintiff’s and

19

the putative class members’ messages is a violation of federal and California law.

20

INTERROGATORY NO. 10:

21

If YOUR response to Interrogatory No. 9 is anything other than an unqualified “no,”

22

IDENTIFY all facts supporting YOUR response.

23

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 10:

24

Plaintiff incorporates and references herein all of the General Objections. Plaintiff objects

25

to this Interrogatory as overly broad and unduly burdensome. Plaintiff objects to this

26

Interrogatory on the grounds that it is untimely and premature because discovery in this action is

27

ongoing with substantial discovery yet to occur. Plaintiff objects that Plaintiff has not completed

28

his discovery or investigation of facts relating to this matter, and has not completed preparation
-9-

PLAINTIFF HURLEY’S RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS
CASE NO. C 13-05996 PJH

CONFIDENTIAL
1

for trial, and therefore, this Interrogatory is premature, improper, burdensome, oppressive,

2

harassing, and abusive of the discovery process to the extent that it calls for the disclosure of all

3

facts that support the contentions and allegations in the Complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P.

4

33(a)(2)(“the court may order that [contention interrogatories] need not be answered until

5

designated discovery is complete, or until a pretrial conference or some other time.”). Plaintiff

6

further objects to the extent this Interrogatory purports to seek information covered by the

7

attorney-client privilege or the work product privilege.

8

Subject to and without waiver of the foregoing objections, Plaintiff states as follows:

9

Plaintiff refers to the operative Complaint, which identifies the elements of causes of action under

10

the federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act, and Section 631 of the California Penal

11

Code, respectively, as well as identifies which facts Plaintiff contends establish violations of each

12

element of each of these statutes.

13

INTERROGATORY NO. 11:

14

IDENTIFY all facts that support YOUR allegation in paragraph 3 of YOUR

15

COMPLAINT that “Facebook primarily generates revenue from targeted advertising and the

16

fundamental means of amassing the user data needed for effective targeted advertising is through

17

Facebook’s ‘Like’ function.”

18

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 11:

19

Plaintiff incorporates and references herein all of the General Objections. Plaintiff objects

20

to this Interrogatory as overly broad and unduly burdensome, particularly given that Facebook

21

necessarily has access to its own financial data. Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory on the

22

grounds that it is untimely and premature because discovery in this action is ongoing with

23

substantial discovery yet to occur. Plaintiff objects that Plaintiff has not completed his discovery

24

or investigation of facts relating to this matter, and has not completed preparation for trial, and

25

therefore, this Interrogatory is premature, improper, burdensome, oppressive, harassing, and

26

abusive of the discovery process to the extent that it calls for the disclosure of all facts that

27

support the contentions and allegations in the Complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(a)(2)(“the court

28

may order that [contention interrogatories] need not be answered until designated discovery is
- 10 -

PLAINTIFF HURLEY’S RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS
CASE NO. C 13-05996 PJH

CONFIDENTIAL
1

complete, or until a pretrial conference or some other time.”). Plaintiff further objects to this

2

Interrogatory on the grounds that it is premature, as this Interrogatory may be the subject of

3

expert testimony, to be disclosed at a later date in accordance with the time set by the Court for

4

such disclosures. Plaintiff further objects to the extent this Interrogatory purports to seek

5

information covered by the attorney work product privilege. Subject to and without waiver of the

6

foregoing objections, Plaintiff states as follows:

7

Facebook admits in its Answer to paragraphs 3 and 49 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint that it

8

generates revenue from targeted advertising. See also Facebook’s Form 10-k for the fiscal year

9

ended December 31, 2014, at page 10, in which Facebook represents, “The substantial majority of

10

our revenue is currently generated from third parties advertising on Facebook. For 2014, 2013,

11

and 2012, advertising accounted for 92%, 89% and 84%, respectively, of our revenue.”

12

(Securities and Exchange Commission, Facebook, Inc. Form 10-k, (Fiscal Year ended December

13

31, 2014), http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1326801/000132680115000006/fb-

14

12312014x10k.htm (last visited February 20, 2015)); see also paragraph 49 of the operative

15

Complaint, which cites to Facebook’s Data Use Policy, Section IV, How Advertising and

16

Sponsored Stories Work (updated Dec. 11, 2012).

17

INTERROGATORY NO. 12:

18

IDENTIFY all facts that support YOUR allegation in paragraph 25 of YOUR

19

COMPLAINT that “whenever a private message contains a URL, Facebook uses a software

20

application called a ‘web crawler’ to scan the URL, sending HTTP requests to the server

21

associated with the URL and then seeking various items of information about the web page to

22

which the URL is linked.”

23

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 12:

24

Plaintiff incorporates and references herein all of the General Objections. Plaintiff objects

25

to this Interrogatory as overly broad and unduly burdensome, particularly given that Facebook

26

necessarily has access to its own technical data. Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory on the

27

grounds that it is untimely and premature because discovery in this action is ongoing with

28

substantial discovery yet to occur. Plaintiff objects that Plaintiff has not completed his discovery
- 11 -

PLAINTIFF HURLEY’S RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS
CASE NO. C 13-05996 PJH

CONFIDENTIAL
1

or investigation of facts relating to this matter, and has not completed preparation for trial, and

2

therefore, this Interrogatory is premature, improper, burdensome, oppressive, harassing, and

3

abusive of the discovery process to the extent that it calls for the disclosure of all facts that

4

support the contentions and allegations in the Complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(a)(2)(“the court

5

may order that [contention interrogatories] need not be answered until designated discovery is

6

complete, or until a pretrial conference or some other time.”). Plaintiff further objects to this

7

Interrogatory on the grounds that it is premature, as this Interrogatory may be the subject of

8

expert testimony, to be disclosed at a later date in accordance with the time set by the Court for

9

such disclosures. Subject to and without waiver of the foregoing objections, Plaintiff states as

10

follows: Plaintiff refers to the following articles cited in the operative Complaint: Hi-Tech

11

Bridge, Social Networks: Can Robots Violate User Privacy? (Aug. 27, 2013) (last visited March

12

26, 2015),

13

https://www.htbridge.com/news/social_networks_can_robots_violate_user_privacy.html,

14

Molly McHugh, Facebook Scans Private Messages for Brand Page Mentions, Admits a Bug Is

15

Boosting Likes, Digital Trends (Oct. 4, 2012) (last visited March 26, 2015),

16

http://www.digitaltrends.com/social-media/facebook-scans-private-messages/, Jennifer

17

Valentino-DeVries et al., How Private Are Your Private Facebook Messages?, Wall St. J., (Oct.

18

3, 2012), http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2012/10/03/how-private-are-your-private-messages/ (last

19

visited March 26, 2015).

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 12 -

PLAINTIFF HURLEY’S RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS
CASE NO. C 13-05996 PJH

CONFIDENTIAL
1

Dated: April 1, 2015

LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

By:

/s/ Michael W. Sobol
Michael W. Sobol

Michael W. Sobol (State Bar No. 194857)
[e-mail]
David T. Rudolph (State Bar No. 233457)
[e-mail]
Melissa Gardner (State Bar No. 289096)
[e-mail]
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
275 Battery Street, 29th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3339
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415.956.1008
Rachel Geman
[e-mail]
Nicholas Diamand
[e-mail]
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10013-1413
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 212.355.9592
Hank Bates (State Bar No. 167688)
[e-mail]
Allen Carney
[e-mail]
David Slade
[e-mail]
CARNEY BATES & PULLIAM, PLLC
11311 Arcade Drive
Little Rock, AR 72212
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 501.312.8505
Jeremy A. Lieberman
[e-mail]
POMERANTZ, LLP
600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 212.661.8665

26
27
28
- 13 -

PLAINTIFF HURLEY’S RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS
CASE NO. C 13-05996 PJH

CONFIDENTIAL
1
2
3
4
5

Patrick V. Dahlstrom
[e-mail]
POMERANTZ, LLP
10 S. La Salle Street, Suite 3505
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 312.377.1184

8

Jon Tostrud (State Bar No. 199502)
[e-mail]
TOSTRUD LAW GROUP, PC
1925 Century Park East, Suite 2125
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 310.278.2640

9

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class

6
7

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 14 -

PLAINTIFF HURLEY’S RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS
CASE NO. C 13-05996 PJH

CONFIDENTIAL
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

PROOF OF SERVICE
I am a citizen of the United States and employed in San Francisco County, California. I
am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within-entitled action. My business
address is 275 Battery Street, 29th Floor, San Francisco, California 94111-3339.
I am readily familiar with Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP’s practice for
collection and processing of documents for service via email, and that practice is that the
documents are attached to an email and sent to the recipient’s email account.
I am also readily familiar with this firm’s practice for collection and processing of
correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. Following ordinary business
practices, the envelope was sealed and placed for collection and mailing on this date, and would,
in the ordinary course of business, be deposited with the United States Postal Service on this date.
On April 1, 2015, I caused to be served copies of the following documents:

13
1.

PLAINTIFF MICHAEL HURLEY’S OBJECTIONS AND
RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST
SET OF INTERROGATORIES; and this

2.

PROOF OF SERVICE BY EMAIL AND U.S. MAIL

14
15
16
17

on Defendant in this action through their counsel:

18

Christopher Chorba
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
333 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90071-3197
Email: [e-mail]

19
20
21
22
23
24

Joshua Aaron Jessen
Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP
3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 1200
Irvine, CA 92612
Email: [e-mail]
Executed on April 1, 2015, at San Francisco, California.

25
26

/s/ Melissa A. Gardner
Melissa A. Gardner

27
28
- 15 -

PLAINTIFF HURLEY’S RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS
CASE NO. C 13-05996 PJH

HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

Michael W. Sobol (State Bar No. 194857)
[e-mail]
David T. Rudolph (State Bar No. 233457)
[e-mail]
Melissa Gardner (State Bar No. 289096)
[e-mail]
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
275 Battery Street, 29th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3339
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415.956.1008
Rachel Geman
[e-mail]
Nicholas Diamand
[e-mail]
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10013-1413
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 212.355.9592

Jeremy A. Lieberman
Lesley F. Portnoy
[e-mail]
POMERANTZ, LLP
600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
New York, New York 10016
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 212.661.8665
Patrick V. Dahlstrom
[e-mail]
POMERANTZ, LLP
10 S. La Salle Street, Suite 3505
Chicago, Illinois 60603
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 312.377.1184

Hank Bates (State Bar No. 167688)
[e-mail]
Allen Carney
[e-mail]
David Slade
[e-mail]
CARNEY BATES & PULLIAM, PLLC
11311 Arcade Drive
Little Rock, AR 72212
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 501.312.8505

18
19

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class

20

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

21

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

22

OAKLAND DIVISION

23
24
25
26
27
28

MATTHEW CAMPBELL, MICHAEL
HURLEY, and DAVID SHADPOUR,
Plaintiffs,
v.
FACEBOOK, INC.,

Case No. C 13-05996 PJH
PLAINTIFF DAVID SHADPOUR’S
CORRECTED OBJECTIONS AND
RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT
FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF
INTERROGATORIES

Defendant.
PLAINTIFF SHADPOUR’S
CORRECTED RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS

HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
1

PROPOUNDING PARTY:

FACEBOOK, INC.

2

RESPONDING PARTY:

DAVID SHADPOUR, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated

SET NO.:

ONE (1)

3
4
5

Pursuant to Rules 26 and 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff David

6

Shadpour hereby serves his corrected objections and responses to Defendant Facebook Inc.’s First

7

Set of Interrogatories (“Interrogatories”). These responses are designated “Highly Confidential –

8

Attorneys’ Eyes Only” under the terms of the draft of the Stipulated Protective Order sent by

9

Plaintiffs to Defendant on March 11, 2015.

10
11
12

GENERAL OBJECTIONS
1.

Plaintiff objects to each of Defendant’s Interrogatories to the extent that they,

13

individually or cumulatively, purport to impose on Plaintiff duties and obligations which exceed,

14

or are different, than those imposed on him by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the Local

15

Rules of the Court.

16

2.

Plaintiff generally objects to each Interrogatory to the extent it purports to seek

17

information covered by the attorney-client privilege, the work product privilege, or any other

18

applicable privilege or immunity. Plaintiff further objects to each Interrogatory to the extent that

19

it seeks information prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial of this or any matter.

20

Plaintiff will provide any information that he believes is non-privileged and is otherwise properly

21

discoverable. By providing such information, Plaintiff does not waive any privileges. To the

22

extent that an Interrogatory may be construed as seeking such privileged or protected information

23

or documents, Plaintiff hereby claims such privilege and invokes such protection. The fact that

24

Plaintiff does not specifically object to an individual Interrogatory on the ground that it seeks

25

such privileged or protected information shall not be deemed a waiver of the protection afforded

26

by the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work product doctrine, or any other applicable

27

privilege or protection.

28
-1-

PLAINTIFF SHADPOUR’S
CORRECTED RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS

HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
1

such disclosures. Subject to and without waiver of the foregoing objections, Plaintiff states as

2

follows: See Plaintiff’s responses to Interrogatories No. 2 and 6.

3

INTERROGATORY NO. 8:

4

IDENTIFY all facts regarding all putative class action proceedings in which YOU have

5

been involved, including but not limited to YOUR role in the proceeding (plaintiff, defendant,

6

witness), the claims and defenses raised in each proceeding, the court or other tribunal in which

7

the proceeding occurred, the judicial officer or arbitrator(s) who presided over the proceeding, the

8

case number, the parties to the proceeding, a summary of the testimony and/or DOCUMENTS

9

YOU provided (if any), an identification of YOUR counsel for each proceeding, and the

10

disposition and relief awarded.

11

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 8:

12

Plaintiff incorporates and references herein all of the General Objections. Plaintiff further

13

objects that the Interrogatory seeks irrelevant information. Subject to and without waiver of the

14

foregoing objections, Plaintiff states as follows: Plaintiff has not been involved in any other

15

putative class action proceedings.

16

INTERROGATORY NO. 9:

17

IDENTIFY all facts that support YOUR allegation in paragraph 25 of YOUR

18

COMPLAINT that the “interceptions” YOU contend are unlawful occur “in transit, in

19

transmission, and/or during transfer of users’ private messages.”

20

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 9:

21

Plaintiff incorporates and references herein all of the General Objections. Plaintiff objects

22

to this Interrogatory as overly broad and unduly burdensome. Plaintiff objects to this

23

Interrogatory on the grounds that it is untimely and premature because discovery in this action is

24

ongoing with substantial discovery yet to occur. Plaintiff objects that Plaintiff has not completed

25

his discovery or investigation of facts relating to this matter, and has not completed preparation

26

for trial, and therefore, this Interrogatory is premature, improper, burdensome, oppressive,

27

harassing, and abusive of the discovery process to the extent that it calls for the disclosure of all

28

facts that support the contentions and allegations in the Complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P.
-8-

PLAINTIFF SHADPOUR’S
CORRECTED RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS

HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
1

33(a)(2)(“the court may order that [contention interrogatories] need not be answered until

2

designated discovery is complete, or until a pretrial conference or some other time.”). Plaintiff

3

further objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is premature, as this Interrogatory may

4

be the subject of expert testimony, to be disclosed at a later date in accordance with the time set

5

by the Court for such disclosures. Plaintiff further objects to the extent this Interrogatory purports

6

to seek information covered by the attorney work product privilege. Subject to and without

7

waiver of the foregoing objections, Plaintiff states as follows: Plaintiff refers to the entirety of the

8

operative Complaint, including but not limited to the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 27, 28,

9

35, 36, 37, 40.

10

INTERROGATORY NO. 10:

11

IDENTIFY all facts that support YOUR allegation in paragraph 89 of YOUR

12

COMPLAINT that “Facebook’s practice of intercepting, scanning, and generating ‘Likes’ from,

13

users’ private messages, are not necessary for the rendition of Facebook’s private messaging

14

service, the protection of Facebook’s rights or property, or the security of Facebook users,” and

15

“have not be undertaken in the ordinary course of business of an electronic communication

16

service, as described in 28 U.S.C. § 2510(15).”

17

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 10:

18

Plaintiff incorporates and references herein all of the General Objections. Plaintiff objects

19

to this Interrogatory as overly broad and unduly burdensome. Plaintiff objects to this

20

Interrogatory on the grounds that it is untimely and premature because discovery in this action is

21

ongoing with substantial discovery yet to occur. Plaintiff objects that Plaintiff has not completed

22

his discovery or investigation of facts relating to this matter, and has not completed preparation

23

for trial, and therefore, this Interrogatory is premature, improper, burdensome, oppressive,

24

harassing, and abusive of the discovery process to the extent that it calls for the disclosure of all

25

facts that support the contentions and allegations in the Complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P.

26

33(a)(2)(“the court may order that [contention interrogatories] need not be answered until

27

designated discovery is complete, or until a pretrial conference or some other time.”). Plaintiff

28

objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is premature, as this Interrogatory may be the
-9-

PLAINTIFF SHADPOUR’S
CORRECTED RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS

HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
1

subject of expert testimony, to be disclosed at a later date in accordance with the time set by the

2

Court for such disclosures. Plaintiff further objects to the extent this Interrogatory purports to

3

seek information covered by the attorney-client privilege or the work product privilege.

4

Subject to and without waiver of the foregoing objections, Plaintiff states as follows:

5

Plaintiff refers to the operative Complaint, including but not limited to the following allegations,

6

2, 4, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40,

7

45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 52, 56, 57, 58, 64, and 86, which identify the elements of causes of action

8

under the federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act, and Section 631 of the California

9

Penal Code, respectively, as well as identify which facts Plaintiff contends establish violations of

10

each element of each of these statutes.

11

INTERROGATORY NO. 11:

12

IDENTIFY all facts that support YOUR allegations in paragraphs 59−68 of the

13

COMPLAINT that this ACTION is appropriate for class treatment.

14

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 11:

15

Plaintiff incorporates and references herein all of the General Objections. Plaintiff objects

16

to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is untimely and premature because discovery in this

17

action is ongoing with substantial discovery yet to occur. Plaintiff objects that Plaintiff has not

18

completed his discovery or investigation of facts relating to this matter, and has not completed

19

preparation for trial, and therefore, this Interrogatory is premature, improper, burdensome,

20

oppressive, harassing, and abusive of the discovery process to the extent that it calls for the

21

disclosure of all facts that support the contentions and allegations in the Complaint. See Fed. R.

22

Civ. P. 33(a)(2)(“the court may order that [contention interrogatories] need not be answered until

23

designated discovery is complete, or until a pretrial conference or some other time.”). Plaintiff

24

further objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is premature, as this Interrogatory may

25

be the subject of expert testimony, to be disclosed at a later date in accordance with the time set

26

by the Court for such disclosures.

27
28

Subject to and without waiver of the foregoing objections, Plaintiff states as follows:
Plaintiff refers to the entirety of the operative Complaint, including but not limited to the
- 10 -

PLAINTIFF SHADPOUR’S
CORRECTED RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS

HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
1

allegations in Paragraphs 2, 3, 4, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32,

2

33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 56, 57, 58, 62, 63, 64, and 65.

3
4

Dated: April 2, 2015

LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

By:

/s/ Michael W. Sobol
Michael W. Sobol

Michael W. Sobol (State Bar No. 194857)
[e-mail]
David T. Rudolph (State Bar No. 233457)
[e-mail]
Melissa Gardner (State Bar No. 289096)
[e-mail]
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
275 Battery Street, 29th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3339
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415.956.1008
Rachel Geman
[e-mail]
Nicholas Diamand
[e-mail]
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10013-1413
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 212.355.9592
Hank Bates (State Bar No. 167688)
[e-mail]
Allen Carney
[e-mail]
David Slade
[e-mail]
CARNEY BATES & PULLIAM, PLLC
11311 Arcade Drive
Little Rock, AR 72212
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 501.312.8505
Jeremy A. Lieberman
[e-mail]
POMERANTZ, LLP
600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 212.661.8665

28
- 11 -

PLAINTIFF SHADPOUR’S
CORRECTED RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS

HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
1
2
3
4
5

Patrick V. Dahlstrom
[e-mail]
POMERANTZ, LLP
10 S. La Salle Street, Suite 3505
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 312.377.1184

8

Jon Tostrud (State Bar No. 199502)
[e-mail]
TOSTRUD LAW GROUP, PC
1925 Century Park East, Suite 2125
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 310.278.2640

9

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class

6
7

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 12 -

PLAINTIFF SHADPOUR’S
CORRECTED RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS

HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

PROOF OF SERVICE
I am a citizen of the United States and employed in San Francisco County, California. I
am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within-entitled action. My business
address is 275 Battery Street, 29th Floor, San Francisco, California 94111-3339.
I am readily familiar with Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP’s practice for
collection and processing of documents for service via email, and that practice is that the
documents are attached to an email and sent to the recipient’s email account.
I am also readily familiar with this firm’s practice for collection and processing of
correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. Following ordinary business
practices, the envelope was sealed and placed for collection and mailing on this date, and would,
in the ordinary course of business, be deposited with the United States Postal Service on this date.
On April 2, 2015, I caused to be served copies of the following documents:

13
14

1.

PLAINTIFF DAVID SHADPOUR’S CORRECTED
OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT
FACEBOOK, INC.’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES;
and this

2.

PROOF OF SERVICE BY EMAIL AND U.S. MAIL

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

on Defendant in this action through their counsel:
Christopher Chorba
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
333 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90071-3197
Email: [e-mail]
Joshua Aaron Jessen
Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP
3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 1200
Irvine, CA 92612
Email: [e-mail]
Executed on April 2, 2015, at San Francisco, California.
/s/ Melissa A. Gardner
Melissa A. Gardner

28
- 13 -

PLAINTIFF SHADPOUR’S
CORRECTED RESPONSES TO
FACEBOOK’S 1ST SET OF ROGS