Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 850 Filed 02/06/23 Page 1 of 3
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`IN RE PERSONALWEB
`TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, et al.,
`
`PATENT LITIGATION
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 18-md-02834-BLF (SVK)
`
`ORDER FOLLOWING STUBBS,
`ALDERTON STATUS REPORT OF
`JANUARY 31, 2023 DENYING
`AMAZON’S REQUEST FOR LOGGING
`OF DOCUMENTS
`
`RE: DKT. NOS. 843, 845
`
`The Court is in receipt of the status report prepared by the Stubbs, Alderton law firm
`
`(“SAM”) (Dkt. 843) pursuant to this Court’s orders (Dkts. 836-1, 842) following a hearing on
`
`January 5, 2023. In its most recent order, the Court reiterated that it would ask for further briefing
`
`if needed. Without waiting for an invitation from the Court, Amazon filed a response. Dkt. 845.
`
`Only because the Court was in the process of soliciting a response from Amazon, the Court will,
`
`in this instance, consider the submission.
`
`In pursuit of judgment-debtor PersonalWeb, judgment-creditor Amazon has come to this
`
`Court for assistance in compelling production from PersonalWeb and subpoenaed third parties
`
`Brilliant Digital Entertainment, Inc. (“BDE”), Monto Holdings, Pty, Ltd. (“Monto”), Europlay
`
`Capital Advisors, LLC (“ECA”) and Claria Innovations, LLC (“Claria”). Dkts. 687, 801. As a
`
`result, the Court has had substantial involvement in the process of extracting relevant documents
`
`from PersonalWeb, subpoenaed third parties, and SAM, not a subpoenaed third party but a
`
`custodian of documents over which PersonalWeb has legal control. Dkts. 704, 793, 799, 803, 816,
`
`826, 836, 842.1 In navigating this process, the Court has carefully weighed the generally broad
`
`scope of post-judgment discovery, the third-party status, albeit with ties to PersonalWeb, of the
`
`above-referenced custodians, and the proportionality requirements of Rule 26. With regards to
`
`SAM, production is further complicated by issues of privilege held by persons or entities other
`
`than PersonalWeb which have not been waived. It is against this backdrop that, following
`
`
`1 Of particular note to this dispute is Dkt. 793, wherein the Court clarified that PersonalWeb had
`waived its attorney client privilege.
`
`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 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 850 Filed 02/06/23 Page 2 of 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
`
`Amazon’s motions to compel (Dkts. 687, 801) and the January 5 hearing, SAM was ordered to
`
`address five open issues. Dkt. 836-1. Of those issues, one remains and is the subject of the
`
`current submissions (Dkts. 843, 845):
`
`
`In re documents identified pursuant to the search terms and participants identified at the
`hearing but upon review SAM has a good faith belief either do not belong to PersonalWeb
`or implicate privileges held by third parties, SAM to identify the parameters of the
`problem, including the number of documents at issue, and propose a timeline for resolution
`in accordance with this Order.
`
`In its latest status report, SAM details its review process of the subject documents by
`
`counsel and identifies and quantifies the following categories of documents it is withholding: (1)
`
`documents that do not belong PersonalWeb or belong to other clients of SAM (2,500);
`
`(2) documents that are SAM work product not shared with PersonalWeb’s directors, officers or
`
`employees (9,700); (3) documents that are the product of Europlay Capital Advisors litigation
`
`consulting services who provided confidential consulting services to PersonalWeb’s outside
`
`litigation counsel (5,800); and (4) documents that are not responsive, such as lunch schedules
`
`(4,900). Dkt. 843 at 2.
`
`Amazon points out that SAM is withholding a total of 18,000 (categories 1-3) responsive
`
`documents, without any detail as to the basis for withholding. Dkt. 845. Amazon also complains
`
`that SAM has “artfully worded” the status report to justify withholding otherwise responsive
`
`documents, such as holding back work product unless it was shared specifically with a
`
`PersonalWeb “director, officer or employee.” Id. Amazon asks this Court to order that the 18,000
`
`responsive but withheld documents be formally logged with sufficient information to justify
`
`withholding. Id.
`
`The Court returns to balancing on one hand the broad scope of post-judgment discovery2
`
`and the well-developed record before it as to the relationships between PersonalWeb, the
`
`subpoenaed parties and SAM. See, e.g., Dkts. 801, 808, 814, 824, 833, 834. On the other side of
`
`the balance is SAM’s representations to this Court in its two post-hearing status reports
`
`
`2 The Court is informed that in excess of 100,000 documents have been produced pursuant to its
`previous orders.
`
`2
`
`Northern District of California
`
`United States District Court
`
`

`

`Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 850 Filed 02/06/23 Page 3 of 3
`
`
`
`(Dkts. 837, 843) that its withholding documents only on the good faith belief of counsel that the
`
`documents either do not belong to PersonalWeb or implicate privileged communications or
`
`protected work product of third parties, neither of which are subject to production under this
`
`Court’s prior orders. This Court’s latest order, Dkt. 842, directed SAM to “identify the parameters
`
`of the problem, including the number of documents at issue,” and SAM has done so. As for a
`
`“timeline for resolution,” SAM states that it is continuing to review these categories to ensure
`
`documents were properly withheld, and points to a recent subsequent production of 46 documents
`
`initially improperly designated. Dkt. 843 at 2. SAM further states that it anticipates completion of
`
`its review and withholding tasks in approximately a week’s time. Id.
`
`Amazon’s request that SAM, a third party not under subpoena, develop a detailed log of
`
`18,000 documents sufficient to justify withholding where the only waiver of privilege is by
`
`PersonalWeb and the documents are being withheld based upon a good faith belief of counsel after
`
`detailed review that they are outside the scope of PersonalWeb’s waiver, is not proportional to the
`
`needs of the case on the record before this Court. Although Amazon points to the interrelationship
`
`of the subpoenaed parties, SAM and PersonalWeb as the basis for its charge that SAM created “a
`
`constellation of shell entities to serve the same principals and shield them and PersonalWeb from
`
`every having to pay an adverse judgment,” (Dkt. 845 at 2) that claim is not enough to further
`
`burden SAM in its search for documents belonging to PersonalWeb for production pursuant to this
`
`Court’s prior orders. The Court is satisfied that SAM has fulfilled its obligations in responding to
`
`PersonalWeb’s directive to turn over its documents. The review and any subsequent production
`
`referenced in SAM’s status report is to be completed no later than February 10, 2023, and SAM
`
`is to file a statement attesting to its completion of that process no later than February 13, 2023.
`
`SO ORDERED.
`
`Dated: February 6, 2023
`
`
`
`
`
`SUSAN VAN KEULEN
`United States Magistrate Judge
`
`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
`
`