Disney Enterprises, Inc. et al v. Hotfile Corp. et al

Filing 314

MOTION for Hearing Request of Defendants Hotfile Corporation and Anton Titov For Oral Argument on Defendants' Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation With Respect to Plaintiff Warner's Motion to "Use" Titov Exhibit 27 In Its Entirety At Trial or On Summary Judgment by Hotfile Corp., Anton Titov. (Munn, Janet)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO. 11-CIV-20427-WILLIAMS-TURNOFF

DISNEY ENTERPRISES, INC., TWENTIETH
CENTURY FOX FILM CORPORATION,
UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS PRODUCTIONS
LLLP, COLUMBIA PICTURES INDUSTRIES, INC.,
and WARNER BROS. ENTERTAINMENT INC.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
HOTFILE CORP., ANTON TITOV, and DOES 1-10.
Defendants.

/

HOTFILE CORP.,
Counterclaimant,
v.
WARNER BROS. ENTERTAINMENT INC.,
Counter-Defendant.

/

REQUEST OF DEFENDANTS HOTFILE CORPORATION AND
ANTON TITOV FOR ORAL ARGUMENT ON DEFENDANTS’
OBJECTIONS TO THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION WITH RESPECT TO PLAINTIFF
WARNER’S MOTION TO “USE” TITOV EXHIBIT 27 IN
ITS ENTIRETY AT TRIAL OR ON SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(b), Defendants Hotfile Corporation (“Hotfile”) and Anton
Titov (“Mr. Titov”) (collectively Hotfile and Mr. Titov are “Defendants”), hereby respectfully
request that the Court conduct oral argument or hearing on Defendants’ Objections to the Report
and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge with Respect to the Motion of Plaintiff Warner
Bros. Entertainment Inc. (“Warner”), to “Use” Titov Exhibit 27 in Its Entirety at Trial or on

CASE NO. 11-CIV-20427-WILLIAMS/TURNOFF
Summary Judgment. This Court will be engaging in de novo review of the Magistrate Judge’s
Report and Recommendation. Defendants’ Objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and
Recommendation concern whether there have been as Defendants contend, violations of this
Court’s Protective Order, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Federal Rules of Evidence
and Rule 4-4.4(b) of the Florida Rules of Professional Conduct, which govern the conduct of
attorneys who appear before this Court.
The de novo ruling this Court will make on Defendants’ Objections will determine
whether Warner is permitted to use in Warner’s presently pending motion for summary judgment
on Hotfile’s counterclaim and at trial, either portions or the whole of a work-product protected
document (Titov Exhibit 27), that was inadvertently produced during discovery and withdrawn
from production in accordance with the Court’s Protective Order. Defendants would like the
opportunity to explain these important issues to the Court. This will be Defendants’ first
opportunity to present these matters to this Court, who previously referred the matters to the
Magistrate Judge. Defendants believe that this Court will benefit by having an opportunity to
ask questions of counsel for both parties regarding the serious issues raised in Defendants’
Objections. Permitting Defendants to have a brief hearing to explain the current state of the law
with respect to inadvertent production, which Defendants respectfully contend the Magistrate
Judge erred in failing to consider, will save this Court time in rendering a decision on evidentiary
and ethical matters that bear on Warner’s pending motion for summary judgment on the
counterclaim, but also potentially on the conduct of a trial before this Court. Defendants believe
that one half hour should suffice for the hearing or oral argument on Defendants’ Objections.

2

CASE NO. 11-CIV-20427-WILLIAMS/TURNOFF
CERTIFICATE OF GOOD FAITH ATTEMPT TO RESOLVE
I hereby certify that pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(a)(3), prior to filing this motion, counsel
for Defendants, Janet T. Munn, communicated with counsel for the Plaintiff Warner Bros.
Entertainment Inc., Steven B. Fabrizio, by e-mail and that Plaintiff objects to the Court holding a
hearing on Defendants’ Objections.
s/ Janet T. Munn
Janet T. Munn, Esq.

DATED: March 5, 2012

Respectfully submitted,
s/ Janet T. Munn
Janet T. Munn, Esq. Fla. Bar No. 501281
Email: [e-mail]
Rasco Klock
283 Catalonia Avenue, Suite 200
Coral Gables, Fl 33134
Telephone: [phone]
Telecopy: 305.476.7102
And

/s/Roderick M. Thompson
Roderick M. Thompson, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice)
Email: [e-mail]
Andrew Leibnitz, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice)
Email: [e-mail]
Anthony P. Schoenberg, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice)
Email: [e-mail]
Deepak Gupta, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice)
Email: [e-mail]
Janel Thamkul, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice)
Email: [e-mail]
FARELLA BRAUN + MARTEL LLP
235 Montgomery St.
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: [phone]
Telecopy: 415.954.4480
3

CASE NO. 11-CIV-20427-WILLIAMS/TURNOFF
And
Valentin Gurvits, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice)
Email: [e-mail]
BOSTON LAW GROUP
825 Beacon Street, Suite 20
Newton Center, MA 02459
Telephone: [phone]
Telecopy: 617.928.1802
Counsel for Defendants Hotfile Corporation
and Anton Titov

4

CASE NO. 11-CIV-20427-WILLIAMS/TURNOFF
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on March 5, 2012, a true and correct copy of the foregoing document
was served on all counsel of record or pro se parties identified below either via transmission of
Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those
counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of Electronic Filing.
Karen L. Stetson, Esq.
GRAY-ROBINSON, P.A.
Email: [e-mail]
1221 Brickell Avenue
Suite 1600
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: [phone]
Telecopy: 305.416.6887

Karen R. Thorland, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice)
Senior Content Protection Counsel
Email: [e-mail]
Motion Picture Association of America, Inc.
15301 Ventura Boulevard, Building E
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403-5885
Telephone: [phone]

Steven B. Fabrizio, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice)
Email: [e-mail]
Duane C. Pozza, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice)
Email: [e-mail]
Luke C. Platzer, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice)
Email: [e-mail]
JENNER AND BLOCK, LLP
1099 New York Ave, N.W.
Suite 900
Washington, DC 20001
Telephone: [phone]
Telecopy: 202.639.6066
By: /s/ Janet T. Munn
Janet T. Munn

5