`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`ACCELERATION BAY LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`Civil Action No. 16-453-RGA
`
`ACTIVISION BLIZZARD, INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`ACCELERATION BAY LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`ELECTRONIC ARTS, INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`ACCELERATION BAY LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Civil Action No. 16-454-RGA
`
`V.
`
`Civil Action No. 16-455-RGA
`
`TAKE-TWO INTERACTIVE
`SOFTWARE, INC., et al.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`The Special Master entered Special Master Order No. 3 on May 19, 2017. (D.I. 155). 1
`
`ORDER
`
`1 For simplicity, unless otherwise indicated, I only cite to the docket in the first-listed
`
`case.
`
`
`
`Case 1:16-cv-00455-RGA Document 158 Filed 06/23/17 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 16152
`
`There are objections from both sides. I review them de nova.
`
`Plaintiffs objections are strange, as Plaintiff has, it asserts, complied with the order.
`
`(DJ. 172, p. l ). Defendants question whether Plaintiff has complied with the order. (DJ. 183, p.
`
`1 ). Thus, I interpret there to be no objections to the order, and I therefore ADOPT the order.
`
`Any questions about compliance with the order should be brought initially to the Special Master.
`
`One Defendant, Activision Blizzard, has filed objections. (DJ. 174). That was on June
`
`9, 2017. Defendant's objections are that the Special Master declined to consider imposing
`
`sanctions, believing that issue should more appropriately be considered by me. Defendant
`
`represented that, as required by my order (Civ. Act. No. 15-228, DJ. 94 ("the parties must serve,
`
`file and docket with the Court ... any relevant portion of the record made before [the Special
`
`Master] which pertains specifically to the objections.")), it would "work with Plaintiff to compile
`
`and submit an Appendix with all necessary materials. (DJ. 174, p.2). There may be a little
`
`ambiguity as to the exact requirements of the order, but as of today, Defendant has not filed
`
`anything with the Court to satisfy its representation. Plaintiff responded, noting that Defendant
`
`had not done this, and identifying where the documents it wanted me to consider could be found.
`
`(D.I. 182). I eventually found the letters that made the parties' arguments to the Special Master.
`
`(D.1. 173-1 at 223, 352).
`
`First, in order to cure any ambiguity in the order appointing the Special Master, I
`
`specifically authorize the Special Master to decide any sanctions issues that are encompassed in
`
`or permitted by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure relating to discovery. See Fed. R. Civ. P.
`
`53(c)(2) ("The master may by order impose on a party any noncontempt sanction provided by
`
`Rule 37 or 45").
`
`Second, in view of the fact that the parties have a history with the Special Master, his
`
`
`
`Case 1:16-cv-00455-RGA Document 158 Filed 06/23/17 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 16153
`
`input on a request for sanctions, even acknowledging that it would be subject to de nova review,
`
`would be of significant assistance to me. Thus, I will "resubmit to the master with instructions,"
`
`see Fed. R. Civ. P. 53(t)(l), the request by Activision for sanctions. I request that the Special
`
`Master issue a ruling on Activision's motion for sanctions.
`
`IT IS SO ORDERED this g;Bctay of June 2017.
`
`
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
