AdTrader, Inc. v. Google LLC

Filing 118

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi re 110 Discovery Dispute re Communications with Publishers and Advertisers. (vkdlc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/21/2019)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6

SAN JOSE DIVISION

7
ADTRADER, INC., et al.,

8

Plaintiffs,

9
v.

10

GOOGLE LLC,

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

Case No.17-cv-07082-BLF (VKD)

Defendant.

12

ORDER RE DISCOVERY DISPUTE RE
COMMUNICATIONS WITH
PUBLISHERS AND ADVERTISERS
Re: Dkt. No. 110

Defendant Google LLC (“Google”) and plaintiffs (collectively, “AdTrader”) dispute

13
14

whether and in what form Google may provide notice of this Court’s prior discovery order

15

requiring Google to produce information about an agreed sample of publishers and advertisers.

16

AdTrader objects to Google’s proposed communication in its entirety, but in the alternative

17

AdTrader says Google’s communication should be revised to omit certain text. In addition,

18

AdTrader asks that the Court order Google to comply with prior and future discovery orders

19

without further delay due to Google’s desire to provide notice to third parties.

20

I.

BACKGROUND

21

The parties have agreed to the production of certain data for randomly-selected samples of

22

publishers and advertisers who have participated in Google’s Ad Exchange (“AdX”) service. Dkt.

23

No. 110 at 1. On January 3, 2019, the Court issued an order resolving a dispute concerning

24

whether the data must include the publishers’ and advertisers’ names and contact information.

25

Dkt. No. 104 at 2-6.

26

Google says that prior to making the required production it intends to notify the sampled

27

publishers and advertisers. Specifically, in addition to advising the publishers and advertisers of

28

this Court’s order and providing background information about the case, Google proposes to

1

include the following instruction:

2

If you wish to be heard by the court before Google produces this
information to the lawyers for the plaintiffs in the lawsuit discussed
below, you must (1) file a motion for a protective order in that lawsuit,
and (2) provide a copy of the file-stamped motion to us by emailing
[Google’s outside counsel] by 5 p.m. Pacific Time on February XX,
2019. Whether you choose to file any such motion is entirely up to
you. Google cannot give you legal advice.

3
4
5
6

Dkt. No. 110, at 1-2, Exs. A, B. Google says that such notice is necessary, at least to the

7

publishers and some of the advertisers, because Google’s agreements with them require advance

8

notice of the disclosure of their confidential information. Google says the data it has been ordered

9

to provide is confidential.
AdTrader responds that Google has no obligation to provide notice, as the data to be

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

disclosed is not confidential to the publishers or advertisers, but is information generated by

12

Google in the operation of its business. Further, AdTrader objects that Google’s proposed

13

communication, and specifically the excerpted text, will spawn unnecessary “satellite litigation”

14

by third parties, when the necessary protections for any confidential information are already in

15

place. Finally, AdTrader objects to Google’s delaying its production pending resolution of

16

unwarranted concern about providing notice.

17

II.

18

DISCUSSION
Based on the record presented in the parties’ joint submission, the Court is skeptical of

19

Google’s claim that it has a legal or contractual obligation to provide notice based on the nature of

20

the data that it must disclose for the sampled publishers and advertisers. However, even if the

21

Court were to find that the data is not confidential to Google’s publishers or advertisers, and its

22

disclosure does not require advance notice, the Court’s authority to limit Google’s (or AdTrader’s)

23

communications with putative class members or fact witnesses is informed by First Amendment

24

considerations, which must be balanced against the Court’s duty to ensure those communications

25

are not coercive or misleading. See Kleiner v. The First National Bank of Atlanta, 751 F.2d 1193,

26

1203-07 (11th Cir. 1985); Camp v. Alexander, 300 F.R.D. 617, 620-21 (N.D. Cal. 2014).

27
28

The disputed portion of Google’s proposed communication may be read as inviting
publishers and advertisers to object to the discovery the Court has already ordered Google to
2

1

make. More specifically, the disputed text is misleading about both the timing of Google’s

2

production and the availability of relief from the Court’s prior order. In instructing publishers and

3

advertisers of what they “must” do “if [they] wish to be heard by the court before Google produces

4

this information to the lawyers for the plaintiffs,” Google implies that it will delay its production

5

until objections are heard and that the Court will, in fact, hear and resolve objections before

6

Google is required to produce information the Court has already ordered produced.
The Court has already issued an order requiring production of the data responsive to

7
8

AdTrader’s Interrogatories Nos. 7-10. Google may so inform the sampled publishers and

9

advertisers and may include a neutral explanation of what the case is about, but it may not include
the second paragraph of the proposed communication. In addition, Google’s communication

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

should make clear that its designation of the data as “confidential” is pursuant to the protective

12

order that has already been entered. For the avoidance of doubt, the Court reproduces the text of

13

the permitted communication with the sampled publishers and advertisers as attachments to this

14

order.

15
16
17
18

Google must produce the data responsive to Interrogatories Nos. 7-10 no later than March
1, 2018.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 21, 2019

19
20
VIRGINIA K. DEMARCHI
United States Magistrate Judge

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3

ATTACHMENT A

1
2
3

Subject: Legal Notice About Your Google Publishing Account

Court Order About Your Google Publishing Account

4
5

Hello,

6

Google was ordered by a California federal court to produce information relating to your
publishing account. This email serves as notice to you that Google will comply with that
court order on [DATE] by providing the name and AccountID (XXX-XXX- XXXX)
associated with your account in our records. In addition, Google will produce data
showing every instance when your account was debited for invalid activity and the
amount of those debits. The court also issued a protective order in this case, and
Google will designate your information as confidential pursuant to that protective order.
This designation prohibits your information from being publicly disclosed or used for any
purpose outside of this lawsuit against Google.

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

Please note that this notice has been sent to you by a no-reply email address.
Replies sent to [e-mail] will not be opened, read, or reviewed.

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

Background on the court order:
The court order was entered in AdTrader, Inc., et al. v. Google LLC pending in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of California, Case No. 5:17-cv-07082-BLF.
This lawsuit was filed against Google on behalf of a potential class of Google Marketing
Platform (previously DoubleClick Bid Manager), Authorized Buyers (previously AdX), and
Google Ads (previously AdWords) advertisers. The plaintiffs generally allege that Google
failed to provide advertisers credits when it discovered invalid publisher activity.
As part of this lawsuit and a related suit pending before the same court, plaintiffs
requested that Google produce information related to the value, frequency, and amount
of debits issued for invalid activity detected on randomly-selected publishers’ accounts.
Your account was among those randomly-selected. Over Google’s objection, the court
recently ruled that Google must accompany this information with the names of each
publisher in question.

22
23

It is possible that the plaintiffs’ lawyers will use this information to contact you, but this
does not make you a party to this case.

24
Regards,
25
26

Google Legal Investigations Support

27
28
4

ATTACHMENT B

1
2
3

Subject: Legal Notice About Your Google Advertising Account

4

Court Order About Your Google Advertising Account

5

Hello,

6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

Google was ordered by a California federal court to produce information relating to your
advertising account. This email serves as notice to you that Google will comply with that
court order on [DATE] by providing the name and customer ID (XXX-XXX- XXXX)
associated with your account in our records. In addition, Google will produce 1) the total
amount your account was invoiced, by quarter, on ADX/DBM/ADWORDS; and 2) the
total value of credits you received from Google, by quarter, for ad fraud, spam, or other
invalid activity. The court also issued a protective order in this case, and Google will
designate your information as confidential pursuant to that protective order. This
designation prohibits your information from being publicly disclosed or used for any
purpose outside of this lawsuit against Google.
Please note that this notice has been sent to you by a no-reply email address.
Replies sent to [e-mail] will not be opened, read, or reviewed.

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Background on the court order:
The court order was entered in AdTrader, Inc., et al. v. Google LLC pending in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of California, Case No. 5:17-cv-07082-BLF.
This lawsuit was filed against Google on behalf of a potential class of Google Marketing
Platform (previously DoubleClick Bid Manager), Authorized Buyers (previously AdX), and
Google Ads (previously AdWords) advertisers. The plaintiffs generally allege that Google
failed to provide advertisers credits when it discovered invalid publisher activity.
As part of this lawsuit and a related suit pending before the same court, plaintiffs
requested that Google produce information related to the levels of advertising spending
on various Google services and the value of credits for invalid activity received for a
randomly selected group of advertisers. Your account was among those randomly
selected. Over Google’s objection, the court recently ruled that Google must
accompany this information with the names of each of the advertisers in question.
It is possible that the plaintiffs’ lawyers will use this information to contact you, but this
does not make you a party to this case.
Regards,

26
Google Legal Investigations Support
27
28
5