Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe

Filing 182

MINUTE ORDER granting in part and denying in part plaintiff's 125 Motion to Compel Production of Defendant's Hard Drive; denying plaintiff's 136 Motion to Compel Defendant's Son's Hard Drive, and plaintiff's 141 , 170 Motion to Compel Production of Communications Between Defendant's Attorneys and Defendant's Son's Lawyer; denying plaintiff's 126 Motion to Compel Responses to Five Questions Posed and Unanswered in Defendant's Depo sition; striking defendant's 143 Motion to Compel Source Code; declining to award attorney's fees or costs to either party in connection with discovery motions addressed in this Minute Order; RENOTING defendant's 174 MOTION for Summary Judgment : Noting Date 11/1/2019. Authorized by Judge Thomas S. Zilly. (SWT)

Case 2:17-cv-01731-TSZ Document 182 Filed 09/19/19 Page 1 of 2

1
2
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

4
5

STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC,

6

Plaintiff,
7

C17-1731 TSZ
v.

8

MINUTE ORDER
JOHN DOE (73.225.38.130),

9
Defendant.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable
Thomas S. Zilly, United States District Judge:
(1)
Plaintiff’s motion to compel production of defendant’s hard drive, 1 docket
no. 125, is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part, as follows. Plaintiff may designate
one expert to examine the “imaged” hard drive. Such examination shall occur, within
twenty-one (21) days of the date of this Minute Order, at a facility upon which the parties
mutually agree. Defendant’s expert may also be present during the examination. Such
examination shall be limited to searching for existing and/or deleted files matching the
hash values set forth in Exhibit A to the Complaint, docket no. 1. If any such files are
discovered, plaintiff’s expert may copy and/or otherwise make a record concerning the
presence of such files, which may be provided to plaintiff’s counsel along with any report
concerning the examination. Plaintiff (and/or its attorneys and/or its experts) may not
take possession of the “imaged” hard drive (or the original drive) and may not search for
or view any other materials on the “imaged” hard drive, including any items protected by
attorney-client or work-product privilege. Except as granted, plaintiff’s motion is denied.

19
20

1

Plaintiff has moved with respect to two hard drives, but defendant has only one relevant hard
drive (Serial No. 9VP05TWX) of which defendant’s expert Michael Yasumoto made a copy for
21
forensic purposes (the “imaged” hard drive). See Yasumoto Report, Ex. 10 to Edmondson Decl.
(docket no. 175-10). Although defendant has purchased other used computers to refurbish (and
22 presumably sell) them, plaintiff makes no motion to compel the hard drives of those devices.

23
MINUTE ORDER - 1

Case 2:17-cv-01731-TSZ Document 182 Filed 09/19/19 Page 2 of 2

1
2
3
4
5

(2)
Plaintiff’s motion to compel production of defendant’s son’s hard drive,
docket no. 136, and plaintiff’s motion to compel production of communications between
defendant’s attorneys and defendant’s son’s lawyers, docket no. 141 & 170, are
DENIED. Plaintiff’s request to examine defendant’s son’s hard drive is not proportional
to the needs of the case, which has been narrowed to solely defendant’s counterclaim for
declaratory judgment of his own (as opposed to his son’s) non-infringement of plaintiff’s
copyrighted materials. Pursuant to the common defense and work-product doctrines,
plaintiff is not entitled to communications between defendant’s attorneys and defendant’s
son’s lawyers.

(3)
Plaintiff’s motion to compel responses to five questions posed and
unanswered in defendant’s deposition, docket no. 126, is DENIED. To the extent not
7 already produced, however, defendant shall provide to plaintiff within fourteen (14) days
of the date of this Minute Order copies of any fee agreements between him and his
8 attorneys.
6

(4)
Defendant’s motion to compel source code, docket no. 143, is STRICKEN
without prejudice to refiling if necessary after the Court rules on defendant’s motion for
10 summary judgment.
9

(5)
The Court DECLINES to award attorney’s fees or costs to either party in
11 connection with the discovery motions addressed in this Minute Order.
12

(6)
Defendant’s motion for summary judgment, docket no. 174, is RENOTED
to November 1, 2019. Any supplemental response relating solely to the examination of
13 defendant’s “imaged” hard drive, which shall not exceed eight (8) pages in length, shall
be filed by plaintiff on or before October 28, 2019. Any supplemental reply, which shall
14 not exceed four (4) pages in length, shall be filed by defendant on or before the new
noting date.
15
(7)
The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Minute Order to all counsel of
16 record.
17

Dated this 19th day of September, 2019.

18

William M. McCool
Clerk

19

s/Karen Dews
Deputy Clerk

20
21
22
23
MINUTE ORDER - 2