`
`MICHAEL A. SHERMAN (SBN 94783)
`masherman@stubbsalderton.com
`JEFFREY F. GERSH (SBN 87124)
`jgersh@stubbsalderton.com
`STUBBS ALDERTON & MARKILES, LLP
`15260 Ventura Blvd., 20th Floor
`Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
`Telephone:
`(818) 444-4500
`Facsimile:
`(818) 444-4520
`
`Former Attorneys for PERSONALWEB
`TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`SAN JOSE DIVISION
`CASE NO.: 5:18-md-02834-BLF
`IN RE PERSONALWEB TECHNOLOGIES,
`LLC, ET., AL., PATENT LITIGATION
`
`CASE NO.: 5:18-cv-00767-BLF
`
`AMAZON.COM, INC. and AMAZON WEB
`SERVICE, INC.,
`
`CASE NO.: 5:18-cv-05619-BLF
`
` Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`
`PERSONALWEB TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, et
`al.,
`
` Defendants.
`PERSONALWEB TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, et
`al.,
`
`STATEMENT OF STUBBS ALDERTON
`& MARKILES, LLP IN RESPONSE TO
`THE UPDATED STATUS REPORT OF
`AMAZON.COM, INC., AMAZON WEB
`SERVICES, INC. AND TWITCH
`INTERATIVE, INC.
`
`JUDGE: Hon. Susan van Keulen
`HEARING DATE: January 6, 2023
`TIME: 1:30 p.m.
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`
`TWITCH INTERACTIVE, INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`STATEMENT OF STUBBS ALDERTON & MARKILES, LLP
`IN RESPONSE TO THE UPDATED STATUS REPORT
`
`
`CASE NO: 5:18-MD-02834-BLF
`CASE NO: 5:18-CV-00767-BLF
`CASE NO.: 5:18-CV-05619-BLF
`
`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
`
`STUBBS ALDERTON & MARKILES, LLP
`
`15260 VENTURA BLVD.
`
`SHERMAN OAKS, CALIFORNIA 91403
`
`20TH FLOOR
`
`
`
`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 834 Filed 01/05/23 Page 2 of 4
`
`
`
`Amazon.com, Inc., Amazon Web Services, and Services, Inc. and Twitch Interactive, Inc.
`
`(collectively “Amazon”) unilaterally filed an Updated Status Report with respect to the hearing
`
`originally set for January 5, 2023 at 1:30 p.m., (now continued to January 6, 2023) without ever
`
`seeking Stubbs Alderton & Markiles, LLP’s (“SAM”), position. Amazon’s report distorts the facts
`
`and attacks SAM in the process. The very first paragraph of Amazon’s report accuses PersonalWeb
`
`of only “last week” instructing SAM to turn over documents and cites to Exhibit A of Mr. Gregorian’s
`
`Declaration, Dkt. 828-2, at page 3. Mr. Gregorian simply misstates the documents/emails in order to
`
`paint SAM in the most unfavorable light before this Court. Amazon’s attacks on SAM are simply
`
`unwarranted and unnecessary. SAM has been diligently working to provide documents to
`
`PersonalWeb’s new counsel, Lewis Roca. (Gersh Dec. ¶ 2).
`
`SAM has undertaken to provide and has provided documents to Lewis Roca on a rolling basis
`
`and continues to do so. To date, SAM has delivered approximately 4.3 gigabytes of data to Lewis
`
`Roca which consist of approximately 14,000 emails with approximately 4,000 pdf attachments, 1800
`
`Word documents, approximately 455 (originally estimated at 520) Excel spreadsheets, 730 images,
`
`580 text files, 115 compressed files (uncompressed), and other documents. Approximately 27
`
`mailboxes have been searched for emails and documents and approximately 23,000 PersonalWeb
`
`documents have been delivered to Lewis Roca. (Gersh Dec. ¶ 3.) More documents will be
`
`forthcoming. In fact, it is anticipated that today, January 5, 2023, or at the latest tomorrow, hard
`
`copies of certain documents in possession of SAM are going to be delivered to Lewis Roca;
`
`approximately 5 banker type boxes. (Gersh Dec. ¶ 3)
`
`Amazon then attacks SAM directly and accuses SAM of failing to discuss “what paper or
`
`electronic files it maintains for PersonalWeb” and cites once again to Exhibit C of Mr. Gregorian’s
`
`declaration (Dkt. 828-4).
`
`This Court should note that on December 28, 2022, Mr. Gersh of SAM sent a detailed response
`
`to Mr. Lavin explaining the domains that were searched, that the search cut off was extended from
`
`July 31, 2021 [not July 31, 2022] to September 15, 2022 (the date that SAM was no longer counsel
`
`for PersonalWeb), advised counsel for Amazon that searches were continuing and roughly how much
`
`time had already been spent through the Christmas holidays conducting searches and what additional
`1
`STATEMENT OF STUBBS ALDERTON & MARKILES, LLP
`IN RESPONSE TO THE UPDATED STATUS REPORT
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CASE NO: 5:18-MD-02834-BLF
`CASE NO: 5:18-CV-00767-BLF
`CASE NO.: 5:18-CV-05619-BLF
`
`
`
`
`
`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
`
`STUBBS ALDERTON & MARKILES, LLP
`
`15260 VENTURA BLVD.
`
`20TH FLOOR
`
`SHERMAN OAKS, CALIFORNIA 91403
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 834 Filed 01/05/23 Page 3 of 4
`
`
`
`search terms were run, all of which were responsive to Mr. Lavin’s December 26, 2022 email (Dkt
`
`828-4) as Exhibit C to Mr. Gregorian’s declaration at page 4. At no time did Mr. Gersh state in the
`
`referenced email that he has “no information” as declared by Mr. Gregorian.
`
`What is most troubling is Amazon’s counsel, accusing SAM of participating in a “shell game”
`
`with PersonalWeb, without any evidence to support its claim (Dkt 828-4, at 2). Amazon simply wants
`
`to continue to beat on SAM despite the hundreds and hundreds of hours it has put into reviewing
`
`documents and emails and providing same to PersonalWeb’s counsel, Lewis Roca.
`
`Amazon further misstates the email that it references from Mr. Gersh in Mr. Gregorian’s
`
`declaration at Exhibit C, (Dkt 828-4 at 2). Amazon takes out of context the word “prohibited”
`
`claiming that the email somehow says that SAM is “prohibited” from communicating with its former
`
`client. That is not the context at all in which the email was written. Mr. Gersh’s email references a
`
`cutoff date of September 15, 2022 as the date when it no longer represented PersonalWeb in the
`
`District Court matter. This seemed like the most logical date to run the searches to, since it was the
`
`date SAM no longer represented PersonalWeb. Any communications after that between SAM and
`
`its former client PersonalWeb in the District Court matter should still remain privileged, including
`
`communications regarding the Federal Circuit matter.
`
`Counsel for Amazon then attacks SAM on “technical issues” citing missing pages, missing
`
`attachments, no load files with document metadata. This is not true. Whenever SAM has been
`
`advised of a "technical issue”, it has worked diligently to provide the missing information or sought
`
`to understand what happened. In fact, load files were provided to Lewis Roca, and when SAM was
`
`later informed they were in the wrong format or a format they could not read, the format was changed
`
`and the documents resent to Lewis Roca. The document metadata is found on the load files sent to
`
`Lewis Roca, as well as parent/child information (i.e., attachments to the main email). SAM learned
`
`from its third-party document management company, Everlaw, that the pages all appear as originally
`
`transmitted and are informed that nothing was intentionally deleted or omitted. (Gersh Dec. ¶ 8,
`
`Ex. 1.)
`
`
`2
`STATEMENT OF STUBBS ALDERTON & MARKILES, LLP
`IN RESPONSE TO THE UPDATED STATUS REPORT
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CASE NO: 5:18-MD-02834-BLF
`CASE NO: 5:18-CV-00767-BLF
`CASE NO.: 5:18-CV-05619-BLF
`
`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
`
`STUBBS ALDERTON & MARKILES, LLP
`
`15260 VENTURA BLVD.
`
`20TH FLOOR
`
`SHERMAN OAKS, CALIFORNIA 91403
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 834 Filed 01/05/23 Page 4 of 4
`
`
`
`Dated: January 5, 2023
`
`STUBBS, ALDERTON & MARKILES, LLP
`
`By: /s/ Jeffrey F. Gersh
`Michael A. Sherman
`Jeffrey F. Gersh
`
`
`
`
`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
`
`3
`STATEMENT OF STUBBS ALDERTON & MARKILES, LLP
`IN RESPONSE TO THE UPDATED STATUS REPORT
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CASE NO: 5:18-MD-02834-BLF
`CASE NO: 5:18-CV-00767-BLF
`CASE NO.: 5:18-CV-05619-BLF
`
`STUBBS ALDERTON & MARKILES, LLP
`
`15260 VENTURA BLVD.
`
`20TH FLOOR
`
`SHERMAN OAKS, CALIFORNIA 91403
`
`
`
`