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
JJessen@gibsondunn.com
JEANA BISNAR MAUTE, SBN 290573
JBisnarMaute@gibsondunn.com
ASHLEY M. ROGERS, SBN 286252
ARogers@gibsondunn.com
1881 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, California 94304
Telephone: (650) 849-5300
Facsimile: (650) 849-5333
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
GAIL E. LEES, SBN 90363
GLees@gibsondunn.com
CHRISTOPHER CHORBA, SBN 216692
CChorba@gibsondunn.com
333 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, California 90071
Telephone: (213) 229-7000
Facsimile: (213) 229-7520
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
dslade@cbplaw.com
James Allen Carney
acarney@cbplaw.com
Joseph Henry Bates, III
Carney Bates & Pulliam, PLLC
hbates@cbplaw.com
8
9
10
11
Jeremy A. Lieberman
Pomerantz Grossman Hufford Dahlstrom & Gross LLP
jalieberman@pomlaw.com
12
13
Melissa Ann Gardner
mgardner@lchb.com
Nicholas Diamand
ndiamand@lchb.com
Rachel Geman
rgeman@lchb.com
Michael W. Sobol
Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP
msobol@lchb.com
14
15
16
17
18
Jon A Tostrud
Tostrud Law Group, P.C.
jtostrud@tostrudlaw.com
19
20
Lionel Z. Glancy
Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP
info@glancylaw.com
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
JJessen@gibsondunn.com
JEANA BISNAR MAUTE, SBN 290573
JBisnarMaute@gibsondunn.com
ASHLEY M. ROGERS, SBN 286252
ARogers@gibsondunn.com
1881 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, California 94304
Telephone: (650) 849-5300
Facsimile: (650) 849-5333
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
GAIL E. LEES, SBN 90363
GLees@gibsondunn.com
CHRISTOPHER CHORBA, SBN 216692
CChorba@gibsondunn.com
333 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, California 90071
Telephone: (213) 229-7000
Facsimile: (213) 229-7520
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
dslade@cbplaw.com
James Allen Carney
acarney@cbplaw.com
Joseph Henry Bates, III
Carney Bates & Pulliam, PLLC
hbates@cbplaw.com
8
9
10
11
Jeremy A. Lieberman
Pomerantz Grossman Hufford Dahlstrom & Gross LLP
jalieberman@pomlaw.com
12
13
Melissa Ann Gardner
mgardner@lchb.com
Nicholas Diamand
ndiamand@lchb.com
Rachel Geman
rgeman@lchb.com
Michael W. Sobol
Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP
msobol@lchb.com
14
15
16
17
18
Jon A Tostrud
Tostrud Law Group, P.C.
jtostrud@tostrudlaw.com
19
20
Lionel Z. Glancy
Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP
info@glancylaw.com
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
JJessen@gibsondunn.com
JEANA BISNAR MAUTE, SBN 290573
JBisnarMaute@gibsondunn.com
ASHLEY M. ROGERS, SBN 286252
ARogers@gibsondunn.com
1881 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, California 94304
Telephone: (650) 849-5300
Facsimile: (650) 849-5333
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
GAIL E. LEES, SBN 90363
GLees@gibsondunn.com
CHRISTOPHER CHORBA, SBN 216692
CChorba@gibsondunn.com
333 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, California 90071
Telephone: (213) 229-7000
Facsimile: (213) 229-7520
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
dslade@cbplaw.com
James Allen Carney
acarney@cbplaw.com
Joseph Henry Bates, III
Carney Bates & Pulliam, PLLC
hbates@cbplaw.com
8
9
10
11
Jeremy A. Lieberman
Pomerantz Grossman Hufford Dahlstrom & Gross LLP
jalieberman@pomlaw.com
12
13
Melissa Ann Gardner
mgardner@lchb.com
Nicholas Diamand
ndiamand@lchb.com
Rachel Geman
rgeman@lchb.com
Michael W. Sobol
Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP
msobol@lchb.com
14
15
16
17
18
Jon A Tostrud
Tostrud Law Group, P.C.
jtostrud@tostrudlaw.com
19
20
Lionel Z. Glancy
Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP
info@glancylaw.com
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)
msobol@lchb.com
David T. Rudolph (State Bar No. 233457)
drudolph@lchb.com
Melissa Gardner (State Bar No. 289096)
mgardner@lchb.com
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
275 Battery Street, 29th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3339
Telephone: 415.956.1000
Facsimile: 415.956.1008
Rachel Geman
rgeman@lchb.com
Nicholas Diamand
ndiamand@lchb.com
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10013-1413
Telephone: 212.355.9500
Facsimile: 212.355.9592
Jeremy A. Lieberman
Lesley F. Portnoy
info@pomlaw.com
POMERANTZ, LLP
600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
New York, New York 10016
Telephone: 212.661.1100
Facsimile: 212.661.8665
Patrick V. Dahlstrom
pdahlstrom@pomlaw.com
POMERANTZ, LLP
10 S. La Salle Street, Suite 3505
Chicago, Illinois 60603
Telephone: 312.377.1181
Facsimile: 312.377.1184
Hank Bates (State Bar No. 167688)
hbates@cbplaw.com
Allen Carney
acarney@cbplaw.com
David Slade
dslade@cbplaw.com
CARNEY BATES & PULLIAM, PLLC
11311 Arcade Drive
Little Rock, AR 72212
Telephone: 501.312.8500
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)
msobol@lchb.com
David T. Rudolph (State Bar No. 233457)
drudolph@lchb.com
Melissa Gardner (State Bar No. 289096)
mgardner@lchb.com
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
275 Battery Street, 29th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3339
Telephone: 415.956.1000
Facsimile: 415.956.1008
Rachel Geman
rgeman@lchb.com
Nicholas Diamand
ndiamand@lchb.com
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10013-1413
Telephone: 212.355.9500
Facsimile: 212.355.9592
Hank Bates (State Bar No. 167688)
hbates@cbplaw.com
Allen Carney
acarney@cbplaw.com
David Slade
dslade@cbplaw.com
CARNEY BATES & PULLIAM, PLLC
11311 Arcade Drive
Little Rock, AR 72212
Telephone: 501.312.8500
Facsimile: 501.312.8505
Jeremy A. Lieberman
info@pomlaw.com
POMERANTZ, LLP
600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: 212.661.1100
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
pdahlstrom@pomlaw.com
POMERANTZ, LLP
10 S. La Salle Street, Suite 3505
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: 312.377.1181
Facsimile: 312.377.1184
8
Jon Tostrud (State Bar No. 199502)
jtostrud@tostrudlaw.com
TOSTRUD LAW GROUP, PC
1925 Century Park East, Suite 2125
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: 310.278.2600
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: cchorba@gibsondunn.com
21
22
23
Joshua Aaron Jessen
Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP
3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 1200
Irvine, CA 92612
Email: jjessen@gibsondunn.com
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)
msobol@lchb.com
David T. Rudolph (State Bar No. 233457)
drudolph@lchb.com
Melissa Gardner (State Bar No. 289096)
mgardner@lchb.com
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
275 Battery Street, 29th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3339
Telephone: 415.956.1000
Facsimile: 415.956.1008
Rachel Geman
rgeman@lchb.com
Nicholas Diamand
ndiamand@lchb.com
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10013-1413
Telephone: 212.355.9500
Facsimile: 212.355.9592
Jeremy A. Lieberman
Lesley F. Portnoy
info@pomlaw.com
POMERANTZ, LLP
600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
New York, New York 10016
Telephone: 212.661.1100
Facsimile: 212.661.8665
Patrick V. Dahlstrom
pdahlstrom@pomlaw.com
POMERANTZ, LLP
10 S. La Salle Street, Suite 3505
Chicago, Illinois 60603
Telephone: 312.377.1181
Facsimile: 312.377.1184
Hank Bates (State Bar No. 167688)
hbates@cbplaw.com
Allen Carney
acarney@cbplaw.com
David Slade
dslade@cbplaw.com
CARNEY BATES & PULLIAM, PLLC
11311 Arcade Drive
Little Rock, AR 72212
Telephone: 501.312.8500
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)
msobol@lchb.com
David T. Rudolph (State Bar No. 233457)
drudolph@lchb.com
Melissa Gardner (State Bar No. 289096)
mgardner@lchb.com
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
275 Battery Street, 29th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3339
Telephone: 415.956.1000
Facsimile: 415.956.1008
Rachel Geman
rgeman@lchb.com
Nicholas Diamand
ndiamand@lchb.com
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10013-1413
Telephone: 212.355.9500
Facsimile: 212.355.9592
Hank Bates (State Bar No. 167688)
hbates@cbplaw.com
Allen Carney
acarney@cbplaw.com
David Slade
dslade@cbplaw.com
CARNEY BATES & PULLIAM, PLLC
11311 Arcade Drive
Little Rock, AR 72212
Telephone: 501.312.8500
Facsimile: 501.312.8505
Jeremy A. Lieberman
info@pomlaw.com
POMERANTZ, LLP
600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: 212.661.1100
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
pdahlstrom@pomlaw.com
POMERANTZ, LLP
10 S. La Salle Street, Suite 3505
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: 312.377.1181
Facsimile: 312.377.1184
8
Jon Tostrud (State Bar No. 199502)
jtostrud@tostrudlaw.com
TOSTRUD LAW GROUP, PC
1925 Century Park East, Suite 2125
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: 310.278.2600
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: cchorba@gibsondunn.com
19
20
21
22
23
24
Joshua Aaron Jessen
Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP
3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 1200
Irvine, CA 92612
Email: jjessen@gibsondunn.com
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)
msobol@lchb.com
David T. Rudolph (State Bar No. 233457)
drudolph@lchb.com
Melissa Gardner (State Bar No. 289096)
mgardner@lchb.com
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
275 Battery Street, 29th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3339
Telephone: 415.956.1000
Facsimile: 415.956.1008
Rachel Geman
rgeman@lchb.com
Nicholas Diamand
ndiamand@lchb.com
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10013-1413
Telephone: 212.355.9500
Facsimile: 212.355.9592
Jeremy A. Lieberman
Lesley F. Portnoy
info@pomlaw.com
POMERANTZ, LLP
600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
New York, New York 10016
Telephone: 212.661.1100
Facsimile: 212.661.8665
Patrick V. Dahlstrom
pdahlstrom@pomlaw.com
POMERANTZ, LLP
10 S. La Salle Street, Suite 3505
Chicago, Illinois 60603
Telephone: 312.377.1181
Facsimile: 312.377.1184
Hank Bates (State Bar No. 167688)
hbates@cbplaw.com
Allen Carney
acarney@cbplaw.com
David Slade
dslade@cbplaw.com
CARNEY BATES & PULLIAM, PLLC
11311 Arcade Drive
Little Rock, AR 72212
Telephone: 501.312.8500
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)
msobol@lchb.com
David T. Rudolph (State Bar No. 233457)
drudolph@lchb.com
Melissa Gardner (State Bar No. 289096)
mgardner@lchb.com
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
275 Battery Street, 29th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3339
Telephone: 415.956.1000
Facsimile: 415.956.1008
Rachel Geman
rgeman@lchb.com
Nicholas Diamand
ndiamand@lchb.com
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10013-1413
Telephone: 212.355.9500
Facsimile: 212.355.9592
Hank Bates (State Bar No. 167688)
hbates@cbplaw.com
Allen Carney
acarney@cbplaw.com
David Slade
dslade@cbplaw.com
CARNEY BATES & PULLIAM, PLLC
11311 Arcade Drive
Little Rock, AR 72212
Telephone: 501.312.8500
Facsimile: 501.312.8505
Jeremy A. Lieberman
info@pomlaw.com
POMERANTZ, LLP
600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: 212.661.1100
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
pdahlstrom@pomlaw.com
POMERANTZ, LLP
10 S. La Salle Street, Suite 3505
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: 312.377.1181
Facsimile: 312.377.1184
8
Jon Tostrud (State Bar No. 199502)
jtostrud@tostrudlaw.com
TOSTRUD LAW GROUP, PC
1925 Century Park East, Suite 2125
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: 310.278.2600
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: cchorba@gibsondunn.com
Joshua Aaron Jessen
Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP
3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 1200
Irvine, CA 92612
Email: jjessen@gibsondunn.com
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
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?