throbber
Case 4:12-cv-05404-YGR Document 207 Filed 03/13/18 Page 1 of 2
`
`1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20004-2595 g p202 624-2500 g f202 628-5116
`
`
`
`Astor Henry Lloyd Heaven
`(202) 624-2599
`aheaven@crowell.com
`
`
`
`
`
`March 13, 2018
`
`
`
`VIA ECF
`
`Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu
`United States District Court for the Northern District of California
`
`Oakland Courthouse, Courtroom 4 - 3rd Floor
`1301 Clay Street, Oakland, CA 94612
`
`
`Re:
`
` Ward v. Apple Inc., No. 4:12-cv-05404
`
`Dear Judge Ryu:
`
`We write to supplement the Joint Discovery Letter (Dkt. 205) filed by Plaintiffs in Ward
`v. Apple Inc., No. 4:12-cv-05404, and third parties AT&T Mobility LLC (“ATTM”), Glenn
`Lurie, and Ralph De La Vega.
`
`On March 8, 2018, Plaintiffs served a document subpoena (the “March 8 Subpoena”) on
`ATTM that included 9 additional requests for production. ATTM served objections to the
`document subpoena on March 12, 2018. Because ATTM had yet to serve objections to the
`March 8 Subpoena at the time the parties filed the Joint Discovery Letter, ATTM only requested
`that the Court quash the first five subpoenas served on ATTM, its employees, and former
`officers, and not the March 8 Subpoena.
`
`The parties now dispute ATTM’s discovery obligations in response to the March 8
`Subpoena, given the current status of the case. Plaintiffs argue that they need the requested
`discovery from ATTM given ATTM’s role in the provision of iPhone voice and data service, and
`ATTM argues that the additional requests (which, together with the previous document
`subpoena, now total 89 pending requests) are not proportional to the needs of the case. The
`parties’ current positions mirror the positions articulated in the Joint Discovery Letter. Because
`any ruling on the Joint Discovery Letter would likely pertain to all of the subpoenas, the parties
`respectfully request that Your Honor also include the March 8 Subpoena in its assessment of the
`parties’ discovery dispute.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Crowell & Moring LLP g www.crowell.com g Washington, DC g New York g San Francisco g Los Angeles g Orange County g London g Brussels
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 4:12-cv-05404-YGR Document 207 Filed 03/13/18 Page 2 of 2
`
`Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu
`March 13, 2018
`Page 2
`
`Very truly yours,
`
`
`
`/s/_____________
`
`
`Katie Yablonka
`Astor H.L. Heaven (pro hac vice)
`
`
`
`cc: Mark C. Rifkin (by email)
`
`Michael Liskow (by email)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/___________________
`Rachele R. Rickert
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Crowell & Moring LLP g www.crowell.com g Washington, DC g New York g San Francisco g Los Angeles g Orange County g London g Brussels
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket