Specht et al v. Google Inc et al

Filing 130

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS held on 09/03/09 before the Honorable Harry D. Leinenweber. Court Reporter Contact Information: KRISTA BURGESON, 312-435-5567, [e-mail]. IMPORTANT: The transcript may be viewed at the court's public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through the Court Reporter or PACER. For further information on the redaction process, see the Court's web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov under Quick Links select Policy Regarding the Availability of Transcripts of Court Proceedings. Redaction Request due 10/13/2009. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 10/23/2009. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 12/21/2009. (Burgeson, Krista)

Specht et al v. Google Inc et al

Doc. 130

Case 1:09-cv-02572 Document 130

Filed 09/22/09 Page 1 of 7

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
vs.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

ERICH SPECHT, et al., Plaintiffs,

GOOGLE, INC., et al., Defendants.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 09 C 2572 Chicago, Illinois September 3, 2009 9:30 o'clock a.m.

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS - MOTION BEFORE THE HONORABLE HARRY D. LEINENWEBER APPEARANCES:

For the Plaintiffs:

LAW OFFICE OF MARTIN J. MURPHY MR. MARTIN J. MURPHY 2811 RFD Long Grove, Illinois 60047 847-540-8899 and NOVACK & MACEY MR. JOHN F. SHONKWILER 100 North Riverside Plaza Chicago, IL 60606 312-419-6900

For the Defendant, Google, Inc.:

GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP MR. HERBERT H. FINN MR. RICHARD D. HARRIS 77 West Wacker Drive Chicago, Illinois 60601 312-456-8400

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 1:09-cv-02572 Document 130

Filed 09/22/09 Page 2 of 7

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Court Reporter:

FEDERAL OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER MS. KRISTA BURGESON 219 South Dearborn Street Chicago, Illinois 60604 312-435-5567 [e-mail]

Case 1:09-cv-02572 Document 130

Filed 09/22/09 Page 3 of 7

3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
things.

THE CLERK: 09 C 2572, Specht versus Google. MR. MURPHY: Good morning, your Honor. Martin Murphy on behalf of plaintiffs. MR. SHONKWILER: And John Shonkwiler, your Honor, on behalf of plaintiffs. MR. HARRIS: Good morning, your Honor. Richard Harris and Herb Finn on behalf of defendant, Google. MR. FINN: Good morning, your Honor. THE COURT: 28 days to answer or otherwise plead to the affirmative defenses and counterclaims. Any objection? MR. HARRIS: If that is a reasonable extension to the Court, that is reasonable to us. THE COURT: Fine. Motion granted. MR. HARRIS: Your Honor, there are a few other

I believe part of the motion requested a date certain for a case management conference and scheduling order, and with the 28 days coming in now for the extension, we probably would want to hold that conference and go through with a scheduling order after the answer is resolved. THE COURT: That makes sense. MR. HARRIS: I assume that is okay with plaintiff. But in the interim, because both sides now want to

Case 1:09-cv-02572 Document 130

Filed 09/22/09 Page 4 of 7

4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

engage in discovery, would it be possible, your Honor, for us to start going into discovery, even before a case management order, or does the Court want to wait for that? THE COURT: That is fine with me. MR. SHONKWILER: Well, your Honor, we are not going to answer the counterclaim -- we may answer some counts, but there are many we won't. And we will have a motion to dismiss. I don't know that that will be resolved any time soon. Our preference would be to go ahead and start -THE COURT: Start discovery, yes. MR. SHONKWILER: We would love to. MR. MURPHY: We have started. I have tendered over 4,000 documents to them, issued interrogatories and -THE COURT: It was Mr. Harris who, as I understand it, is saying there is no reason to wait. MR. HARRIS: Not any more. THE COURT: And then after the pleadings are settled, you can come in with the definitive discovery schedule. MR. HARRIS: That is fine. MR. MURPHY: That includes depositions as well, because we held off on depositions because there most likely will be an amended complaint. THE COURT: If you agree to take some depositions now, go ahead and do it. You apparently will be deposing

Case 1:09-cv-02572 Document 130

Filed 09/22/09 Page 5 of 7

5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

people. MR. MURPHY: Because I was in two weeks ago and my motion was denied for leave to take depositions over objection. MR. HARRIS: Your Honor, I think Mr. Murphy just mentioned, if I caught this right, that he will be going ahead now and filing an amended complaint. MR. MURPHY: We have got to discuss it. We are going to be discussing it. MR. HARRIS: Here is one last concern I have got for the Court then. The Court granted plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint when it dismissed most of the defendants out of this case last month. With that in mind, we noticed that it was open ended, and Mr. Murphy has been saying that he may be bringing in another amended complaint or he may not be. So, if we could put a date certain on the open ended leave. THE COURT: Were you going to be filing another complaint? MR. SHONKWILER: That is one of the things we are considering. We were just hired, so we are playing catchup as fast as we can. THE COURT: All right.

Case 1:09-cv-02572 Document 130

Filed 09/22/09 Page 6 of 7

6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

I will give you the same 28 days to file an amended complaint. MR. SHONKWILER: That is fine. MR. HARRIS: Okay. MR. SHONKWILER: We would prefer to have more time, but we want to move this case, too. THE COURT: 28 days to file the amended complaint and 28 days to answer the affirmative defenses and the counterclaims. MR. HARRIS: Thank you. MR. SHONKWILER: And one last point, your Honor. Is discovery open to all subjects now that are permissible, that are relevant under the Federal Rules, as opposed to a limited sense of preliminary discovery? THE COURT: It appears to be the case. MR. SHONKWILER: Okay. THE COURT: That is fine with me. MR. HARRIS: And it is with us as well. MR. FINN: Yes. MR. SHONKWILER: Thank you. MR. MURPHY: Thank you. (Proceedings concluded.)

Case 1:09-cv-02572 Document 130

Filed 09/22/09 Page 7 of 7

7

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

CERTIFICATE

I certify that the foregoing is a correct transcript from the record of proceedings in the above-entitled matter.

/s/Krista Burgeson, CSR, RMR, CRR Federal Official Court Reporter

September 3, 2009 Date