Case 3:21-cv-06536-EMC Document 402 Filed 06/14/23 Page 1 of 4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`MOONBUG ENTERTAINMENT
`LIMITED, et al.,
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`
`BABYBUS (FUJIAN) NETWORK
`TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD, et al.,
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 21-cv-06536-EMC
`
`
`ORDER RE COURT’S REVISED
`PROPOSED JUROR QUESTIONNAIRE
`
`
`
`
`
`Below is the Court’s revised proposed Juror Questionnaire. Any comments to these
`
`questions must be filed by 12:00 Noon, June 15, 2023.
`
`
`
`1. The Plaintiffs in this case are Moonbug Entertainment Limited and Treasure Studio,
`
`Inc. The Defendants are Babybus Co., Ltd. and Babybus (Fujian) Network
`
`Technology Co., Ltd. Do you know any of these companies, or have you had any
`
`dealings or relationships with them? If yes, please explain.
`
`2. Do you recognize, know, or have dealt with the parties’ attorneys? Whom do you
`
`recognize or know? The following is a list of the law firms and individual counsel:
`
`a. Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP
`
`i. Sam Stephen Stake
`
`ii. Robert William Stone
`
`iii. Margret Mary Caruso
`
`iv. Grace E. Chang
`
`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
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Northern District of California
`
`United States District Court
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`MOONBUG ENTERTAINMENT
`LIMITED, et al.,
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`
`BABYBUS (FUJIAN) NETWORK
`TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD, et al.,
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 21-cv-06536-EMC
`
`
`ORDER RE COURT’S REVISED
`PROPOSED JUROR QUESTIONNAIRE
`
`
`
`
`
`Below is the Court’s revised proposed Juror Questionnaire. Any comments to these
`
`questions must be filed by 12:00 Noon, June 15, 2023.
`
`
`
`1. The Plaintiffs in this case are Moonbug Entertainment Limited and Treasure Studio,
`
`Inc. The Defendants are Babybus Co., Ltd. and Babybus (Fujian) Network
`
`Technology Co., Ltd. Do you know any of these companies, or have you had any
`
`dealings or relationships with them? If yes, please explain.
`
`2. Do you recognize, know, or have dealt with the parties’ attorneys? Whom do you
`
`recognize or know? The following is a list of the law firms and individual counsel:
`
`a. Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP
`
`i. Sam Stephen Stake
`
`ii. Robert William Stone
`
`iii. Margret Mary Caruso
`
`iv. Grace E. Chang
`
`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
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Northern District of California
`
`United States District Court
`
`
`
`Case 3:21-cv-06536-EMC Document 402 Filed 06/14/23 Page 2 of 4
`
`
`
`v. Elizabeth M. Devaney
`
`vi. David Graham
`
`vii. Jeffrey William Nardinelli
`
`viii. Elinor C. Sutton
`
`ix. Aaron H. Perahia
`
`x. Rex Lee
`
`b. Fife Law, LLP
`
`i. Enoch Wang
`
`c. Tyz Law Group PC
`
`i. Sean Kristofer Apple
`
`ii. Erin Catherine Jones
`
`iii. Jennifer Lloyd Kelly
`
`iv. Ciara N. McHale
`
`v. Ryan Tyz
`
`vi. Deborah Anne Hedley
`
`vii. Chieh Tung
`
`3. This is a case about alleged infringement of copyrights in CoComelon by Super JoJo.
`
`Plaintiffs claim that Defendants willfully infringe Plaintiffs’ copyrights in characters
`
`and videos in Plaintiffs’ children’s show CoComelon. Plaintiffs also claim that
`
`defendants made misrepresentations to YouTube to cause YouTube to put back up
`
`infringing videos. Plaintiffs seek damages for Defendants’ infringement and
`
`misrepresentations. Defendants deny infringement of the copyrights and deny that they
`
`made any knowing misrepresentations to YouTube. Defendants also dispute the
`
`amount of damages Plaintiffs seek. Have you heard of, or have any knowledge of, the
`
`facts, events, or characters in this case? If so, please explain.
`
`4. Have you or anyone close to you ever been involved in a dispute over the ownership or
`
`use of a creative idea, design, or other intellectual property? If yes, please explain.
`
`5. Do you have strong feelings, positive or negative, towards companies from China?
`
`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
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Northern District of California
`
`United States District Court
`
`
`
`Case 3:21-cv-06536-EMC Document 402 Filed 06/14/23 Page 3 of 4
`
`
`
`6. Do you or members of your household have any special health concerns or medical
`
`conditions which would interfere with your jury service? If so, please explain.
`
`7. Are you fully vaccinated for COVID-19 (one dose of Johnson & Johnson or two doses
`
`of Moderna or Pfizer) and have you received a booster? Please provide date of most
`
`recent shot.
`
`a. No, not fully vaccinated
`
`b. Yes, fully vaccinated, no booster
`
`c. Yes, fully vaccinated, with booster
`
`d. Decline to answer
`
`8. If called to serve as a juror, how concerned are you about COVID-19 if the Court
`
`establishes cautionary protocol (such as social distancing from other jurors, masks for
`
`all except those who are speaking, and maximum ventilation with fresh air intake,
`
`vaccination/testing requirements for participants)?
`
`9. What race do you identify with:
`
`a. African American/Black
`
`b. American Indian/Native Alaskan
`
`c. Asian
`
`d. Caucasian/White
`
`e. Hispanic
`
`f. Multi-Racial
`
`g. Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
`
`h. Other (please specify)
`
`10. Do you know of any other matter which you believe should be called to the Court’s
`
`attention as having some bearing upon your qualifications or ability to sit as a juror, or
`
`which you think may prevent you from rendering a fair and impartial verdict based
`
`solely upon the evidence and my instructions as to the law?
`
`11. This trial is expected to start on Wednesday, July 5, 2023, and last approximately three
`
`(3) weeks until Tuesday or Wednesday, July 25 or 26, 2023 (excluding July 10), plus
`
`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
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Northern District of California
`
`United States District Court
`
`
`
`Case 3:21-cv-06536-EMC Document 402 Filed 06/14/23 Page 4 of 4
`
`
`
`any additional time for jury deliberations. Trial will run from 8:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.
`
`There is no court on Thursdays. Is there any reason why serving as a juror during this
`
`period is impossible or extremely difficult for you? If so, please explain.
`
`12. Is there anything you would like the judge in this case to know about your ability to
`
`serve as a juror?
`
`
`
`IT IS SO ORDERED.
`
`
`
`Dated: June 14, 2023
`
`
`
`______________________________________
`
`EDWARD M. CHEN
`United States District Judge
`
`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
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Northern District of California
`
`United States District Court
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
