Case 1:14-cv-02396-PGG-SN Document 255 Filed 05/06/21 Page 1 of 6
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`
`
`
`
`
`NETWORK-1 TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`GOOGLE LLC and YOUTUBE, LLC,
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`14 Civ. 2396 (PGG-SN)
`
`14 Civ. 9558 (PGG-SN)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`JOINT STIPULATION FOR LIMITED DISCOVERY AFTER
`THE CLOSE OF FACT DISCOVERY
`
`Plaintiff Network-1 Technologies, Inc. and Defendants Google LLC and YouTube, LLC
`
`(collectively, “Google”), through their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate, subject to approval
`
`by this Court, to conduct the following additional limited discovery.
`
`WHEREAS, fact discovery closed on November 1, 2019 (Dkt. No. 2011);
`
`WHEREAS, on February 19, 2021, Google served supplemental contention
`
`interrogatory responses concerning certain of its defenses and the location of portions of the
`
`previously-accused Content ID system (Dkt. No. 248-1);
`
`WHEREAS, on March 12, 2021, Google served a supplemental document production
`
`concerning the same (see Dkt. No. 248-5);
`
`WHEREAS, the Court ordered the parties to meet and confer as to the scope of limited
`
`discovery concerning the same (Dkt. No. 252).
`
`NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereby stipulate and agree as follows:
`
`
`1 Citations to the docket refer to docket entries in Case No. 14 Civ. 2396 (PGG-SN).
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-02396-PGG-SN Document 255 Filed 05/06/21 Page 2 of 6
`
`
`
`1.
`
`Network-1 may serve five additional interrogatories relating to the subject
`
`matter raised in Google’s February 19, 2021 supplemental interrogatory responses.
`
`2.
`
`Network-1 may serve additional requests for production relating to the
`
`following: (1) documents sufficient to show the technical operation of the Content ID System
`
`as of January 2021, to the extent that it is different from the technical operation of the Content
`
`ID system as of November 1, 2019; (2) documents sufficient to show changes in the technical
`
`operation of Content ID since the close of fact discovery; (3) documents sufficient to show
`
`when and how what portions of Content ID were allegedly moved outside the United States
`
`since November 1, 2019; (4) documents regarding all costs, equipment, and manpower
`
`required to effectuate such moves, any ongoing costs for such moves, and how such costs,
`
`equipment, and manpower were computed; (5) documents concerning any challenges
`
`encountered with these moves; (6) documents sufficient to show what portions of Content ID
`
`still operate within the United States, and how Content ID operates for content uploaded by
`
`YouTube users in the United States to the extent different from the operation of the Content ID
`
`system as of November 1, 2019; (7) documents sufficient to show the locations of the Content
`
`ID match servers in 2011, at the time of the transition to the Siberia system, at the close of fact
`
`discovery, and at present; (8) documents sufficient to show the hardware capabilities for
`
`storage and processing at each such location in 2011, at the time of the transition to the Siberia
`
`system, at the close of fact discovery, and at present; (9) documents sufficient to show
`
`Google’s practices regarding load balancing in 2011, at the time of the transition to the Siberia
`
`system, at the close of fact discovery, and at present; (10) communications concerning the
`
`decision to develop the Content ID System as of January 2021; and (11) communications
`
`concerning the implementation of the Content ID System as of January 2021.
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-02396-PGG-SN Document 255 Filed 05/06/21 Page 3 of 6
`
`
`
`3.
`
`Google will produce a privilege log for the March 12, 2021 production as well
`
`as for any subsequent document production that concerns the location of portions of the
`
`previously-accused Content ID system and/or in response to Network-1’s additional requests
`
`for production. Such privileged documents and communications will be logged, even if they
`
`were created after these cases were initiated. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Google will not
`
`log privileged documents created on or after February 19, 2021.
`
`4.
`
`Network-1 may serve a 30(b)(6) deposition notice containing topics concerning
`
`the subject matter of Google’s February 19, 2021 supplemental interrogatory responses and the
`
`subject matter identified in paragraph 2. Google will designate one or more witnesses for
`
`deposition on those topics, and make that witness or those witnesses available for deposition
`
`by remote video using Google Meet and Google Drive at a mutually convenient time. Google
`
`will ensure compliance with any local blocking statutes. Network-1 and Google agree that
`
`they will stipulate to the administration of the deposition oath by the court reporter. The total
`
`time for additional 30(b)(6) deposition testimony shall not exceed seven hours.
`
`5.
`
`Network-1 may also serve 30(b)(1) deposition notices on other individuals
`
`involved with the alleged relocation of portions of the previously-accused Content ID system,
`
`including Hanna Pasula, Matthias Konrad, Demarron Berkley, Christine Moor, Alana Malina,
`
`Alexandru Voicu, Oleg Ryjkov, Michael Keller, and/or any other witness Google indicates an
`
`intent to call to testify at trial. Upon receipt of such notices, Google will make these
`
`individuals available for deposition by remote video using Google Meet and Google Drive at a
`
`mutually convenient time. Any such depositions will be limited in scope to the subject matter
`
`of Google’s February 19, 2021 supplemental interrogatory responses and the subject matter
`
`identified in paragraph 2. Google will ensure compliance with any local blocking statutes.
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-02396-PGG-SN Document 255 Filed 05/06/21 Page 4 of 6
`
`
`
`Network-1 and Google agree that they will stipulate to the administration of the deposition
`
`oath by the court reporter. The total time for additional 30(b)(1) deposition testimony shall not
`
`exceed fourteen hours and the total number of deponents shall not exceed five or the number
`
`of witnesses Google intends to call at trial on this subject matter, whichever is greater.
`
`Network-1 may move for leave of court to depose a number of witnesses exceeding the
`
`foregoing total, and/or to exceed the foregoing fourteen hour 30(b)(1) deposition time total,
`
`upon a showing of good cause. The parties agree that an individual who is noticed for
`
`deposition under Rule 30(b)(1) and also designated to provide testimony under Rule 30(b)(6)
`
`will be deposed no more than once.
`
`6.
`
`Network-1 reserves the right to seek additional document production or to
`
`identify additional 30(b)(1) deponents once it receives Google’s written discovery responses
`
`and document production, and also, to the extent necessary, that it becomes necessary to do so
`
`based on information learned from subsequent depositions. Notwithstanding, without further
`
`leave of court and a showing of good cause, the total time for all 30(b)(1) depositions
`
`permitted under this stipulation shall not exceed fourteen hours and the total number of
`
`deponents shall not exceed five or the number of witnesses Google intends to call at trial on
`
`this subject matter, whichever is greater.
`
`7.
`
`If Google indicates that it seeks to call a witness or witnesses at trial to testify
`
`about the subject matter of Google’s February 19, 2021 supplemental interrogatory responses
`
`or the subject matter identified in paragraph 2 who was not listed on Google’s Rule 26(a)(1)
`
`disclosures, was not designated as a 30(b)(6) witness pursuant to paragraph 4, and was not
`
`otherwise deposed, Network-1 reserves the right to seek leave to take such witness(es)’
`
`deposition(s).
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-02396-PGG-SN Document 255 Filed 05/06/21 Page 5 of 6
`
`
`
`8.
`
`Google reserves the right to object to any discovery requests and deposition
`
`notices served by Network-1 pursuant to this stipulation.
`
`9.
`
`Absent further agreement by the parties, fact discovery permitted by this
`
`stipulation shall be substantially completed by July 15, 2021. If a witness is unavailable for
`
`deposition during this time frame, the parties agree that he or she may be deposed out of time
`
`at a time agreed upon by the parties.
`
`10.
`
`Network-1 also reserves the right to seek leave to serve supplemental expert
`
`reports based upon this supplemental discovery, and Google reserves the right to seek leave to
`
`serve responsive reports. In the event Network-1 seeks leave for this additional expert
`
`discovery, the parties will work cooperatively in an attempt to reach a mutually agreeable
`
`expert discovery schedule.
`
`11.
`
`Network-1 further reserves the right to seek to exclude any of this discovery
`
`and any subsequent supplemental expert reports via motions in limine and/or Daubert motions
`
`in accordance with the Court’s forthcoming order(s) setting trial in this matter.
`
`
`
`SO STIPULATED.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 1:14-cv-02396-PGG-SN Document 255 Filed 05/06/21 Page 6 of 6
`
`Dated: May 6, 2021
`
`RUSS, AUGUST & KABAT
`
`BY: /s/ Amy E. Hayden
`
`Marc A. Fenster (pro hac vice)
`Brian D. Ledahl (pro hac vice)
`Adam S. Hoffman (pro hac vice)
`Paul A. Kroeger (pro hac vice)
`Amy E. Hayden (pro hac vice)
`Jacob R. Buczko (pro hac vice)
`12424 Wilshire Blvd. 12th Floor
`Los Angeles, CA 90025
`Phone: (310) 826-7474
`Fax: (310) 826-6991
`mfenster@raklaw.com
`bledahl@raklaw.com
`ahoffman@raklaw.com
`pkroeger@raklaw.com
`ahayden@raklaw.com
`jbuczko@raklaw.com
`
`Charles R. Macedo
`AMSTER, ROTHSTEIN &
`EBENSTEIN LLP
`90 Park Avenue
`New York, NY 10016
`Phone: (212) 336-8074
`Fax: (212) 336-8001
`cmacedo@arelaw.com
`
`
`Attorneys for Network-1
`Technologies, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP
`
`BY: /s/ Andrew V. Trask
`
`Thomas H. L. Selby (pro hac vice)
`Samuel Bryant Davidoff
`Andrew V. Trask
`Melissa Collins (pro hac vice)
`Graham W. Safty (pro hac vice)
`Sumeet P. Dang (pro hac vice)
`725 Twelfth Street, NW
`Washington, DC 20005
`Phone: (202) 434-5000
`Fax: (202) 434-5029
`tselby@wc.com
`sdavidoff@wc.com
`atrask@wc.com
`mcollins@wc.com
`gsafty@wc.com
`sdang@wc.com
`
`For Matters in New York:
`WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP
`650 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1500
`New York, NY 10022
`
`Kevin Hardy (pro hac vice)
`QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
`SULLIVAN, LLP
`1300 I Street, NW, Suite 900
`Washington, DC 20005
`Phone: (202) 538-8000
`Fax: (202) 538-8100
`kevinhardy@quinnemanuel.com
`
`Attorneys for Google LLC and YouTube, LLC
`
`SO ORDERED.
`
`Date: ___________________
`
`_________________________________
`Hon. Sarah Netburn
`United States Magistrate Judge
`
`6
`
`