Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 733-4 Filed 03/18/22 Page 1 of 167
`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 733-4 Filed 03/18/22 Page 1 of 167
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT 4
`EXHIBIT 4
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 733-4 Filed 03/18/22 Page 2 of 167
`
`
`
`Michael Gerard Fletcher (State Bar No. 070849)
` mfletcher@frandzel.com
`Craig A. Welin (State Bar No. 138418)
` cwelin@frandzel.com
`Bruce D. Poltrock (State Bar No. 162448)
` bpoltrock@frandzel.com
`FRANDZEL ROBINS BLOOM & CSATO, L.C.
`1000 Wilshire Boulevard, Nineteenth Floor
`Los Angeles, California 90017-2427
`Telephone: (323) 852-1000
`Facsimile: (323) 651-2577
`
`Attorneys for Third Parties BRILLIANT
`DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT, INC.;
`EUROPLAY CAPITAL ADVISORS, LLC;
`CLARIA INNOVATIONS, LLC
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
` SAN JOSE DIVISION
`
`
` Case No. 5:18-md-02834-BLF
`
`Case No. 5:18-cv-00767-BLF
`
`Case No. 5:18-cv-05619-BLF
`
`OBJECTIONS OF THIRD PARTY
`BRILLIANT DIGITAL
`ENTERTAINMENT, INC. TO SUBPOENA
`TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS ISSUED BY
`AMAZON.COM, INC., AMAZON WEB
`SERVICES, INC., AND TWITCH
`INTERACTIVE, INC.
`
`
`
`IN RE: PERSONAL WEB TECHNOLOGIES,
`LLC ET AL., PATENT LITIGATION
`
`
`AMAZON.COM, INC., and AMAZON WEB
`SERVICES, INC.,
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`v.
`
`PERSONALWEB TECHNOLOGIES, LLC and
`LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, LLC,
`
`Defendants,
`
`
`PERSONALWEB TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,
`and LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, LLC,
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`
`TWITCH INTERACTIVE, INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 5:18-md-02834-BLF
`4516068v3 | 101334-0002
`1
`OBJECTIONS OF BRILLIANT DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT, INC. TO SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE
`DOCUMENTS ISSUED BY AMAZON.COM, INC., ETC.
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 733-4 Filed 03/18/22 Page 3 of 167
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`Third party Brilliant Digital Entertainment, Inc. (“Brilliant”) objects to the Subpoena to
`Produce Documents, Information, or Objects or to Permit Inspection of Premises in a Civil Action
`(“Subpoena”) issued by Amazon.com, Inc., Amazon Web Services, Inc., and Twitch Interactive,
`Inc. (collectively, “Amazon”) in the above-captioned action (the “Action”) as follows:
`GENERAL OBJECTIONS
`On May 10, 2021, the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles,
`1.
`Northwest District (Van Nuys) (“Receivership Court”), in currently pending Case No.
`21VECV00575, entitled Brilliant Digital Entertainment, Inc., etc., et al., v. PersonalWeb
`Technologies, LLC, etc., et al. (“Receivership Action”) appointed Robb Evans and Associates
`LLC (“Receiver”) as Receiver over Personal Web Technologies, LLC (“PersonalWeb”), pursuant
`to the Receivership Court’s Order for Ex Parte Immediate Appointment of Receiver
`(“Receivership Order”) (copy attached as Exh. 1). The Receivership Court is the first and only
`court to date to have taken jurisdiction over the secured creditors of PersonalWeb, PersonalWeb
`itself, and all of the assets of PersonalWeb, and the subject of the interrelationships between and
`among those parties and those assets.
`2.
`On June 1, 2021, the Receivership Court entered its Order for Entry of Preliminary
`Injunction in Aid of the Receiver (“Injunction Order”) (copy attached as Exh. 2), which confirmed
`the Receiver’s appointment and enjoined certain actions by PersonalWeb, its creditors, judgment
`holders, and others. Amazon has had notice of and received service of the Injunction Order.
`3.
`Brilliant objects to the Subpoena, and each request contained therein, on the
`grounds that its issuance and service violates the Injunction Order, which Order provides, in part:
`… IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that except by leave of this Court,
`during the pendency of the receivership ordered herein, Defendant
`PersonalWeb, and all of its customers, principals, investors,
`collectors, stockholders, lessors, other creditors, judgment holders,
`and other persons seeking to establish or enforce any claim, debt,
`right, lien, or interest against Defendant PersonalWeb, or any of its
`subsidiaries or affiliates, and all others acting for or on behalf of
`such persons, attorneys, trustees, agents, sheriffs, constables,
`marshals, and any other officers and their deputies, and their
`respective attorneys, servants, agents, and employees, be and are
`hereby stayed from:
`Commencing, prosecuting, continuing, or enforcing
`
`(a)
`Case No. 5:18-md-02834-BLF
`4516068v3 | 101334-0002
`2
`OBJECTIONS OF BRILLIANT DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT, INC. TO SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE
`DOCUMENTS ISSUED BY AMAZON.COM, INC., ETC.
`
`
`
`FRANDZEL ROBINS BLOOM & CSATO, L.C.
`
`1000 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, NINETEENTH FLOOR
`
`LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017-2427
`
`(323) 852-1000
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 733-4 Filed 03/18/22 Page 4 of 167
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`
`
`any suit, judgment, lien, levy, or proceeding against Defendant
`PersonalWeb, or any of its subsidiaries or affiliates, except such
`actions may be filed to toll any applicable statute of limitations;
`
`….
`Using self-help or executing or issuing, or causing
`
`(d)
`the execution or issuance of any court attachment, subpoena,
`replevin, execution, levy, writ, or other process for the purpose of
`impounding or taking possession of or interfering with, or creating
`or enforcing a lien upon, any property, wheresoever located, owned
`by, claimed by, or in the possession of Defendant PersonalWeb, or
`any of its subsidiaries or affiliates, or the Receiver appointed
`pursuant to this Order or any agent appointed by said Receiver; and
`
`(e)
`Doing any act or thing whatsoever to interfere with
`the Receiver taking control or possession of, or managing the
`property subject to this receivership; or in any way to interfere with
`the Receiver; or to harass or interfere with the duties of the
`Receiver; or to interfere in any manner with the exclusive
`jurisdiction of this Court over the property and assets of Defendant
`PersonalWeb, or its subsidiaries or affiliates. Provided, however,
`nothing in this paragraph shall prohibit any federal or state law
`enforcement or regulatory authority from commencing or
`prosecuting an action against Defendant PersonalWeb, or its
`subsidiaries or affiliates.
`A court appointing a receiver has exclusive jurisdiction over receivership property.
`4.
`(O’Flaherty v. Belgum (2004) 115 Cal.App.4th 1044, 1062, citing 2 Clark on Receivers (3d
`ed.1959), § 548(a), p. 889.) Further, “it must be held, in conformity with the general rule of
`comity established by a long line of authority, that the court which first takes the subject matter of
`a litigation into its control for the purpose of administering the rights and remedies with relation to
`specific property obtains thereby jurisdiction so to do, to the exclusion of the exercise of a like
`jurisdiction by other tribunals …” (Cutting v. Bryan (1929) 206 Cal. 254, 257 [state court quiet
`title action dismissed where federal receivership action filed first].) This principle applies to both
`federal and state courts. (Princess Lida of Thurn and Taxis v. Thompson (1939) 305 U.S. 456,
`466, 59 S.Ct. 275, 280 [“[T]he principle applicable to both federal and state courts [is] that the
`court first assuming jurisdiction over property may maintain and exercise that jurisdiction to the
`exclusion of the other …”].)
`5.
`On August 10, 2021, Amazon moved to intervene in the Receivership Action (copy
`attached as Exh. 3, without exhibits, except Exh. T, a proposed Complaint in Intervention), and as
`
`Case No. 5:18-md-02834-BLF
`4516068v3 | 101334-0002
`3
`OBJECTIONS OF BRILLIANT DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT, INC. TO SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE
`DOCUMENTS ISSUED BY AMAZON.COM, INC., ETC.
`
`
`
`FRANDZEL ROBINS BLOOM & CSATO, L.C.
`
`1000 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, NINETEENTH FLOOR
`
`LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017-2427
`
`(323) 852-1000
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 733-4 Filed 03/18/22 Page 5 of 167
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`set forth in the proposed Complaint in Intervention specifically sought to involve Brilliant and the
`other secured creditors in the Amazon disputes with PersonalWeb. By Minute Order dated
`November 17, 2021, the Receivership Court denied Amazon’s intervention motion (copy attached
`as Exh. 4) because, in part, Amazon has alternative ways to assert it positions as to PersonalWeb,
`and the secured creditors, in the Receivership Action. Then, on January 14, 2022, Amazon filed a
`Petition for Writ of Supersedeas with the California state Second District Court of Appeal
`(“2DCA”), seeking to stay the Receivership Action pending Amazon’s appeal of the intervention
`denial order (copy of pp. 1-13 attached as Exh. 5). Amazon again lost, the Court of Appeal having
`denied the writ petition by Order filed February 17, 2022 (copy attached as Exh. 6.) But,
`Amazon’s appeal of the intervention denial order remains pending with the 2DCA. Amazon also
`has pending in the Receivership Court its motion to stay the action (copy attached as Exh. 7).
`Amazon has invoked the jurisdiction of both the Receivership Court and the 2DCA with respect to
`these disputes.
`6.
`Brilliant further objects to the Subpoena, and each request contained therein, on the
`grounds that it is improper discovery under the doctrines of federalism and comity to be shown by
`a federal court to a state court, and under Fed. R. Civ. P. 69(a)(2), which not only is a
`contempuous violation of the Injunction Order by Amazon and its legal counsel, but also seeks to
`circumvent Amazon’s two Receivership Action losses regarding its attempt to intervene in the
`Receivership Action to become an active litigant in the state court at this time ----- because doing
`so would interfere with the Receivership. The Subpoena is also an improper “end run” to the
`discovery Amazon wants in the Receivership Action, but to which it is not entitled --- at this time -
`-- because it is not a party to the Receivership action as a result of the Receivership Court’s denial
`of leave to intervene, and it is premature in the Receivership Action for any such litigation
`activities, under the rulings of the Receivership Court and the 2DCA.
`7.
`Brilliant further objects to the Subpoena, and each request contained therein, on the
`grounds that it further appears to be an attempt by Amazon to disrupt and interfere with the
`funding of the Receivership by plaintiffs in the Receivership Action, Brilliant Digital
`Entertainment, Inc., Claria Innovations, LLC, Europlay Capital Advisors, LLC, and Monto
`Case No. 5:18-md-02834-BLF
`4516068v3 | 101334-0002
`4
`OBJECTIONS OF BRILLIANT DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT, INC. TO SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE
`DOCUMENTS ISSUED BY AMAZON.COM, INC., ETC.
`
`
`
`FRANDZEL ROBINS BLOOM & CSATO, L.C.
`
`1000 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, NINETEENTH FLOOR
`
`LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017-2427
`
`(323) 852-1000
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 733-4 Filed 03/18/22 Page 6 of 167
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`Holdings Pty LTD (“Secured Creditors”), and the duties of the Receiver. On December 8, 2021,
`the Receivership Court granted the Receiver’s motion authorizing the Receiver to borrow money
`from the Secured Creditors and issue receivership certificates therefor in an aggregate amount up
`to $1,000,000.00 to fund litigation that could ultimately result in a very significant recovery for
`PersonalWeb (copy of motion attached as Exh. 8; copy of order attached as Exh. 9). This not only
`appears to be an attempt by Amazon to disrupt that funding by causing the Secured Creditors to
`spend money, notwithstanding the Injunction Order, dealing with Amazon’s Subpoena, but is an
`actual attempt to disrupt the funding in the Receivership Action. The receivership assets are IP
`litigation proceedings that are the secured creditors collateral, MAINLY AGAINST AMAZON.
`This is a direct attack to disrupt that litigation and its funding.
`AMAZON’S DEFINITIONS
`The word “You” means Brilliant Digital Entertainment, Inc., including officers,
`1.
`directors, employees, attorneys (including but not limited to Your counsel of record and other
`attorneys representing You in the Receiver Action, as defined below), agents, representatives, and
`any other person acting or purporting to act on behalf of Brilliant Digital Entertainment, Inc.
`2.
`The word “Amazon” means Amazon.com, Inc., Amazon Web Services, Inc., and/or
`Twitch Interactive, Inc.
`3.
`The word “PersonalWeb” means PersonalWeb Technologies, LLC, as well as any
`entity under its control, including officers, directors, employees, agents, representatives, and any
`other person acting or purporting to act on behalf of any of the foregoing.
`4.
`The word “SAM” means Stubbs Alderton & Markiles, LLP, including employees,
`agents, representatives, partners, associates, staff, any other person receiving compensation from
`Stubbs Alderton & Markiles, LLP, and any other person acting or purporting to act on behalf of
`Stubbs Alderton & Markiles, LLP.
`5.
`The word “SAM Ventures” means SAM Venture Partners, including officers,
`directors, employees, agents, representatives, and any other person acting or purporting to act on
`behalf of SAM Venture Partners.
`6.
`The word “document” includes, but is not limited to, the original, and each copy
`Case No. 5:18-md-02834-BLF
`4516068v3 | 101334-0002
`5
`OBJECTIONS OF BRILLIANT DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT, INC. TO SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE
`DOCUMENTS ISSUED BY AMAZON.COM, INC., ETC.
`
`
`
`FRANDZEL ROBINS BLOOM & CSATO, L.C.
`
`1000 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, NINETEENTH FLOOR
`
`LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017-2427
`
`(323) 852-1000
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 733-4 Filed 03/18/22 Page 7 of 167
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`not identical to the original, of the records, reports, memoranda, notes, letters, minutes, contracts,
`tapes, correspondence, text messages, WhatsApp messages, emails, all electronic communications
`of any kind and all writings of any kind, including drafts of any of the foregoing, as well as any
`other tangible things on which information is recorded in writing, sound, electronically or any
`other manner.
`The word “communication” includes every manner of transmitting or receiving
`7.
`information, opinions and thoughts, whether orally, in writing, electronically or otherwise.
`8.
`The term “relating to, evidencing and/or reflecting” means reporting on or with
`respect to, showing or indicating knowledge of, concerning, mentioning, or in any manner
`referring to, either directly or indirectly.
`9.
`The term “all” and “each” shall be construed as all and each.
`10.
`The connectives “all” and “or” shall be construed either conjunctively or
`disjunctively as necessary to bring within the scope of the discovery requests all responses that
`might otherwise be construed to be outside of its scope.
`11.
`The use of the singular form of any word includes the plural and vice versa.
`12.
`The term “concerning” means relating to, referring to, describing, evidencing,
`reflecting, or constituting.
`13.
`The term “person” shall mean any natural person or any business, legal or
`governmental entity, or association.
`14.
`The term “Action” shall mean Case No. 5:18-md-02834-BLF in the United States
`District Court for the Northern District of California, In Re: PersonalWeb Technologies, LLC et
`al.
`
`The term “Receiver Action” shall mean Case No. 21VECV00575 in the Superior
`15.
`Court of California, County of Los Angeles, Brilliant Digital Entertainment, Inc. et al. v.
`PersonalWeb Technologies, LLC.
`16.
`The term “BDE Note” shall mean the financial instrument defined as the BDE Note
`in the Verified Complaint in the Receiver Action, filed April 27, 2021, to include the associated
`Pledge and General Security Agreement.
`Case No. 5:18-md-02834-BLF
`4516068v3 | 101334-0002
`6
`OBJECTIONS OF BRILLIANT DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT, INC. TO SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE
`DOCUMENTS ISSUED BY AMAZON.COM, INC., ETC.
`
`
`
`FRANDZEL ROBINS BLOOM & CSATO, L.C.
`
`1000 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, NINETEENTH FLOOR
`
`LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017-2427
`
`(323) 852-1000
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 733-4 Filed 03/18/22 Page 8 of 167
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`The term “ECA Note” shall mean the financial instrument defined as the ECA Note
`17.
`in the Verified Complaint in the Receiver Action, filed April 27, 2021, to include the associated
`Pledge and General Security Agreement.
`18.
`The term “Claria Note” shall mean the financial instrument defined as the Claria
`Note in the Verified Complaint in the Receiver Action, filed April 27, 2021, to include the
`associated Pledge and General Security Agreement.
`19.
`The term “Monto Note” shall mean the financial instrument defined as the Monto
`Note in the Verified Complaint in the Receiver Action, filed April 27, 2021, to include the
`associated Pledge and General Security Agreement.
`20.
`The term “Notes” shall mean the BDE Note, ECA Note, Claria Note, and Monto
`
`Note.
`
`The term “Collateral” shall mean the property defined as “Collateral” in the
`21.
`Verified Complaint in the Receiver Action, filed April 27, 2021, and set forth in Exhibits 1 and 2
`to the Verified Complaint in the Receiver Action.
`22.
`The term “Intercreditor Agreement” shall mean the agreement defined as the
`“Intercreditor Agreement” in the Verified Complaint in the Receiver Action, filed April 27, 2021.
`OBJECTIONS TO SUBPOENA
`
`REQUEST NO. 1:
`All documents and communications relating to or reflecting the relationship between You
`and PersonalWeb, including, but not limited to, any proposed or actual equity or capital
`contributions made by You to PersonalWeb, any funds provided that PersonalWeb is obligated to
`repay, and any work done for or on behalf of PersonalWeb for which you are entitled to receive or
`received compensation of any kind.
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 1:
`Brilliant incorporates each General Objection herein.
`Brilliant further objects to this request on the grounds that it seeks information that is
`neither relevant to this Action, nor proportional to its needs, nor reasonably calculated to lead to
`the discovery of admissible evidence. Judgment against PersonalWeb has been entered in this
`Case No. 5:18-md-02834-BLF
`4516068v3 | 101334-0002
`7
`OBJECTIONS OF BRILLIANT DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT, INC. TO SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE
`DOCUMENTS ISSUED BY AMAZON.COM, INC., ETC.
`
`
`
`FRANDZEL ROBINS BLOOM & CSATO, L.C.
`
`1000 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, NINETEENTH FLOOR
`
`LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017-2427
`
`(323) 852-1000
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 733-4 Filed 03/18/22 Page 9 of 167
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`Action and enforcement activity is prohibited by the Injunction Order in the Receiver Action.
`Brilliant further objects to this Request on the grounds that, when combined with the
`definitions, it is overly broad, vague, burdensome, oppressive, harassing, and causes undue
`expense, and calls for a production of documents that contain needlessly cumulative information.
`Brilliant further objects to this Request to the extent that production of the requested
`records violates the financial privacy rights of Brilliant and/or its shareholders.
`Brilliant further objects to this Request to the extent that production of the requested
`records violates the financial privacy or other rights of third-parties.
`Brilliant further objects to this Request to the extent that it seeks production of documents
`protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine, which include
`without limitation documents between and among Brilliant and its legal counsel, and documents
`reflecting counsel’s mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal theories.
`Brilliant further objects to the Subpoena to the extent that it seeks Brilliant’s confidential
`or proprietary information and/or trade secrets.
`REQUEST NO. 2:
`All documents and communications regarding this Action or other litigation by
`PersonalWeb or its affiliates, on the one hand, and Amazon or its affiliates, on the other including
`but not limited to the merits of the claims; Amazon’s claim for fees in this Action; and post-
`judgment discovery in this Action.
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 2:
`Brilliant incorporates each General Objection herein.
`Brilliant further objects to this request on the grounds that it seeks information that is
`neither relevant to this Action, nor proportional to its needs, nor reasonably calculated to lead to
`the discovery of admissible evidence. Judgment against PersonalWeb has been entered in this
`Action and enforcement activity is prohibited by the Injunction Order in the Receiver Action.
`Brilliant further objects to this Request on the grounds that, when combined with the
`definitions, it is overly broad, vague, burdensome, oppressive, harassing, and causes undue
`expense, and calls for a production of documents that contain needlessly cumulative information.
`Case No. 5:18-md-02834-BLF
`4516068v3 | 101334-0002
`8
`OBJECTIONS OF BRILLIANT DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT, INC. TO SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE
`DOCUMENTS ISSUED BY AMAZON.COM, INC., ETC.
`
`
`
`FRANDZEL ROBINS BLOOM & CSATO, L.C.
`
`1000 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, NINETEENTH FLOOR
`
`LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017-2427
`
`(323) 852-1000
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 733-4 Filed 03/18/22 Page 10 of 167
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`Brilliant further objects to this Request to the extent that production of the requested
`records violates the financial privacy rights of Brilliant and/or its shareholders.
`Brilliant further objects to this Request to the extent that production of the requested
`records violates the financial privacy or other rights of third-parties.
`Brilliant further objects to this Request to the extent that it seeks production of documents
`protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine, which include
`without limitation documents between and among Brilliant and its legal counsel, and documents
`reflecting counsel’s mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal theories.
`Brilliant further objects to the Subpoena to the extent that it seeks Brilliant’s confidential
`or proprietary information and/or trade secrets.
`REQUEST NO. 3:
`All documents and communications regarding SAM Ventures, PersonalWeb Inc.,
`Eurocapital Business Development, LLC, Kinetech, Inc., or Topodia Limited, including: (a)
`documents reflecting the membership, structure, or principals of these entities; and (b) their
`respective interests in PersonalWeb.
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 3:
`Brilliant incorporates each General Objection herein.
`Brilliant further objects to this request on the grounds that it seeks information that is
`neither relevant to this Action, nor proportional to its needs, nor reasonably calculated to lead to
`the discovery of admissible evidence. Judgment against PersonalWeb has been entered in this
`Action and enforcement activity is prohibited by the Injunction Order in the Receiver Action.
`Brilliant further objects to this Request on the grounds that, when combined with the
`definitions, it is overly broad, vague, burdensome, oppressive, harassing, and causes undue
`expense, and calls for a production of documents that contain needlessly cumulative information.
`Brilliant further objects to this Request to the extent that production of the requested
`records violates the financial privacy rights of Brilliant and/or its shareholders.
`Brilliant further objects to this Request to the extent that production of the requested
`records violates the financial privacy or other rights of third-parties.
`Case No. 5:18-md-02834-BLF
`4516068v3 | 101334-0002
`9
`OBJECTIONS OF BRILLIANT DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT, INC. TO SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE
`DOCUMENTS ISSUED BY AMAZON.COM, INC., ETC.
`
`
`
`FRANDZEL ROBINS BLOOM & CSATO, L.C.
`
`1000 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, NINETEENTH FLOOR
`
`LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017-2427
`
`(323) 852-1000
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 733-4 Filed 03/18/22 Page 11 of 167
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`Brilliant further objects to this Request to the extent that it seeks production of documents
`protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine, which include
`without limitation documents between and among Brilliant and its legal counsel, and documents
`reflecting counsel’s mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal theories.
`Brilliant further objects to the Subpoena to the extent that it seeks Brilliant’s confidential
`or proprietary information and/or trade secrets.
`REQUEST NO. 4:
`Documents and communications relating to the relationship between Monto and Topodia
`Limited, including but not limited to the October 31, 2018 assignment of the Monto Note.
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 4:
`Brilliant incorporates each General Objection herein.
`Brilliant further objects to this request on the grounds that it seeks information that is
`neither relevant to this Action, nor proportional to its needs, nor reasonably calculated to lead to
`the discovery of admissible evidence. Judgment against PersonalWeb has been entered in this
`Action and enforcement activity is prohibited by the Injunction Order in the Receiver Action.
`Brilliant further objects to this Request on the grounds that, when combined with the
`definitions, it is overly broad, vague, burdensome, oppressive, harassing, and causes undue
`expense, and calls for a production of documents that contain needlessly cumulative information.
`Brilliant further objects to this Request to the extent that production of the requested
`records violates the financial privacy rights of Brilliant and/or its shareholders.
`Brilliant further objects to this Request to the extent that production of the requested
`records violates the financial privacy or other rights of third-parties.
`Brilliant further objects to this Request to the extent that it seeks production of documents
`protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine, which include
`without limitation documents between and among Brilliant and its legal counsel, and documents
`reflecting counsel’s mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal theories.
`Brilliant further objects to the Subpoena to the extent that it seeks Brilliant’s confidential
`or proprietary information and/or trade secrets.
`Case No. 5:18-md-02834-BLF
`4516068v3 | 101334-0002
`10
`OBJECTIONS OF BRILLIANT DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT, INC. TO SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE
`DOCUMENTS ISSUED BY AMAZON.COM, INC., ETC.
`
`
`
`FRANDZEL ROBINS BLOOM & CSATO, L.C.
`
`1000 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, NINETEENTH FLOOR
`
`LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017-2427
`
`(323) 852-1000
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 733-4 Filed 03/18/22 Page 12 of 167
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`REQUEST NO. 5:
`All documents and communications between You, on the one hand, and on the other
`PersonalWeb or Europlay Capital Advisors, LLC or Claria Innovations, LLC or Monto Holdings
`Pty Ltd., relating to the BDE Note, the ECA Note, the Claria Note, or the Monto Note.
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 5:
`Brilliant incorporates each General Objection herein.
`Brilliant further objects to this request on the grounds that it seeks information that is
`neither relevant to this Action, nor proportional to its needs, nor reasonably calculated to lead to
`the discovery of admissible evidence. Judgment against PersonalWeb has been entered in this
`Action and enforcement activity is prohibited by the Injunction Order in the Receiver Action.
`Brilliant further objects to this Request on the grounds that, when combined with the
`definitions, it is overly broad, vague, burdensome, oppressive, harassing, and causes undue
`expense, and calls for a production of documents that contain needlessly cumulative information.
`Brilliant further objects to this Request to the extent that production of the requested
`records violates the financial privacy rights of Brilliant and/or its shareholders.
`Brilliant further objects to this Request to the extent that production of the requested
`records violates the financial privacy or other rights of third-parties.
`Brilliant further objects to this Request to the extent that it seeks production of documents
`protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine, which include
`without limitation documents between and among Brilliant and its legal counsel, and documents
`reflecting counsel’s mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal theories.
`Brilliant further objects to the Subpoena to the extent that it seeks Brilliant’s confidential
`or proprietary information and/or trade secrets.
`REQUEST NO. 6:
`All documents and communications between You, on the one hand, and on the other
`PersonalWeb or Europlay Capital Advisors, LLC or Claria Innovations, LLC or Monto Holdings
`Pty Ltd., relating to the status of: (1) the BDE Note or its repayment; (2) the ECA Note or its
`repayment; (3) the Claria Note or its repayment; or (4) the Monto Note or its repayment, limited to
`Case No. 5:18-md-02834-BLF
`4516068v3 | 101334-0002
`11
`OBJECTIONS OF BRILLIANT DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT, INC. TO SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE
`DOCUMENTS ISSUED BY AMAZON.COM, INC., ETC.
`
`
`
`FRANDZEL ROBINS BLOOM & CSATO, L.C.
`
`1000 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, NINETEENTH FLOOR
`
`LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017-2427
`
`(323) 852-1000
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 733-4 Filed 03/18/22 Page 13 of 167
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`the time period between March 1, 2021 and April 30, 2021.
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 6:
`Brilliant incorporates each General Objection herein.
`Brilliant further objects to this request on the grounds that it seeks information that is
`neither relevant to this Action, nor proportional to its needs, nor reasonably calculated to lead to
`the discovery of admissible evidence. Judgment against PersonalWeb has been entered in this
`Action and enforcement activity is prohibited by the Injunction Order in the Receiver Action.
`Brilliant further objects to this Request on the grounds that, when combined with the
`definitions, it is overly broad, vague, burdensome, oppressive, harassing, and causes undue
`expense, and calls for a production of documents that contain needlessly cumulative information.
`Brilliant further objects to this Request to the extent that production of the requested
`records violates the financial privacy rights of Brilliant and/or its shareholders.
`Brilliant further objects to this Request to the extent that production of the requested
`records violates the financial privacy or other rights of third-parties.
`Brilliant further objects to this Request to the extent that it seeks production of documents
`protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine, which include
`without limitation documents between and among Brilliant and its legal counsel, and documents
`reflecting counsel’s mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal theories.
`Brilliant further objects to the Subpoena to the extent that it seeks Brilliant’s confidential
`or proprietary information and/or trade secrets.
`REQUEST NO. 7:
`All documents and communications between You and Europlay Capital Advisors, LLC or
`Claria Innovations, LLC or Monto Holdings Pty Ltd. relating to the Intercreditor Agreement,
`including the negotiation or drafting of such agreement.
`RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 7:
`Brilliant incorporates each General Objection herein.
`Brilliant further objects to this request on the grounds that it seeks information that is
`neither relevant to this Action, nor proportional to its needs, nor reasonably calculated to lead to
`Case No. 5:18-md-02834-BLF
`4516068v3 | 101334-0002
`12
`OBJECTIONS OF BRILLIANT DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT, INC. TO SUBPOENA TO PRODU