Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 1 of 20
`
`Ashley M. Gjovik, JD
`In Propria Persona
`2108 N St. Ste. 4553
`Sacramento, CA, 95 816
`(408) 883 - 4428
`legal@ash ley gjov ik.c om
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`United States District Court
`
`Northern District of California
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ASHLEY GJOVIK, an individual,
`
`Case No. 3:23 -CV-04597-EMC
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` vs.
`
`
`
`ADMIN. MOTION & DECLAR ATION
`
`REQUESTING INFORMATION.
`
`-
`
`Inquir y about hearing atte ndance
`
`APPLE INC, a corporation,
`
`- Adde ndum to 8/2 8/24 transcript
`
`Defendant.
`
`Civil Local Rule 7 -11
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 2 of 20
`
`Administrative Motion & Declaration:
`
`My name is Ashley Marie Gjovik. I am a self -represented Plaintiff in this
`
`above captioned matter. I make this Declaration based upon my personal
`
`knowledge . I have personal knowledge of all facts stated in this Declaration, and
`
`if called to testify, I could and would testify competently thereto. This is an
`
`Administrative Motion under Civil L.R. 7-11, requesting 1) clarification of a court
`
`order issued Aug. 28 2024, and 2) an addendum or notation to be added to the
`
`Aug. 28 2024 transcripts.
`
`I. SUMMARY
`
`On Aug. 28 2024 this Cour t held a hearing for the Defendant’s latest
`
`Motions to Dismiss and Motion to Strike. Previously, the Cour t ordered that any
`
`hearings where one party needs to join via Zoom will be held on Zoom for all
`
`parties. (May 16 2024, Dkt. 75 , pages 23 -24, excerpt on the next page).
`
`However, on Aug. 26 2024 the co urt asked the Defendant to join the Aug.
`
`28 2024 hearing in person. With such little notice, there was no way for me, a pro
`
`se Plaintiff, to fundraise and arrange a way to travel across the countr y for the
`
`hearing. I joined the hearing through Zoom and the Defendant joined in person as
`
`the Courthouse.
`
`During the hearing there were severe internet connection issues that
`
`appeared to have originated from the court’s connection and/or Zoom instance,
`
`as other people on the Zoom experienced the same connection issues that I did .
`
`I reported this to the Deputy on Aug. 28 2024.
`
`Because Apple had attorneys in person at the court room, a significant
`
`portion of the hearing was unavailable to me, and which ended up essentially being
`
`an ex parte conversation between Apple and the court, and that I was not able to
`
`hear or participate i n.
`
`On Aug. 30 2024, the deputy communicated that a ticket was filed with IT
`
`about the connection issues. (“Thank you for your email. This problem has been
`
`reported to our IT departme nt. ”)
`
`
`
`Administrative Motion & Declaration | - 1 - | 3:23-CV-04597-EMC
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 3 of 20
`
`May 20 2 024 Transcr ipts at pages 23 -24 , Dkt 75.
`
`
`
`Administrative Motion & Declaration | - 2 - | 3:23-CV-04597 -EMC
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 4 of 20
`
`As reported to the Deputy, I could only hear a small portion of the hearing
`
`and had no idea what was asked or said by the court or Defendant during that time.
`
`I only learned of some questions and instructions when I read the transcripts after
`
`the fact. Please see Exhibit B for an attached witness statement from another
`
`person who was on the Zoom version of the Aug. 28 hearing and also witnessed
`
`the connection issues.
`
`The transcripts also revealed to me that many things I tried to say were
`
`never heard by the court – including answering the court’s questions on
`
`substantive matters (resulting in dismissals with prejudice), and also tr ying to tell
`
`the court about the internet connection issues I was experiencing. I was c oncerned
`
`about my supplementar y brief being denied and I had requested permission to file
`
`a shor t brief with the critical points I was tr ying to make during the hearing. The
`
`court denied this request on Oct. 1 2024 and dismissed claims with prejudice
`
`regardless of the actual merit.
`
`On Sept. 13 2024 I contacted the Deputy and asked if I could file a letter
`
`apologizing to the court. The transcripts revealed that the court was ver y upset
`
`with me and thought I was intentionally interrupting Judge Chen. I said I was
`
`“mortified” and asked for a way to apologize – as Judge Chen had told me not to
`
`file anything else to the docket for the pending Motion to Dismiss.
`
`The transcript revealed to me that the court had ordered that I was no longer
`
`able to attend hearings via Zoom, and that I must fly across the countr y for any
`
`future hearings. I did not hear this at that time due to the court’s internet
`
`connection issues. At the end of the hearing, the court scheduled the next hearing
`
`on Zoom for all parties – and I did hear that.
`
`Thus, I also asked the deputy for clarification if I am still expected to join
`
`in person. The Deputy never responded to my request or statement. Attached as
`
`Exhibit A is a true and correct copy my emails with the court deputy about the
`
`hearing. The emails are dated between Aug. 28 2024 and Sept. 14 2024.
`
`
`
`II.
`
`IMPACT & PREJUDICE
`
`It appears some of my claims may have been dismissed with prejudice at
`
`Administrative Motion & Declaration | - 3 - | 3:23-CV-04597 -EMC
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 5 of 20
`
`least partially due to these technical issues.
`
`Further, despite my attempt to dispute the Defendant’s points in my
`
`Opposition, 1 the supplementar y brief, 2 and during the hearing – the points I made
`
`were disregarded or not heard, and instead the court said I “conceded” to these
`
`points.
`
`Aug 28 2024 Tra nscr ipt at page 11 . (Dkt 106) .
`
`
`
`
`
`I did not concede these points and instead provided an extensively detailed
`
`analysis of the statute and statutor y scheme in the supplemental brief, and
`
`attempted to argue these points in depth during the hearin g. However, it appears
`
`the court did not hear most of my arguments due to the connection issues . I also
`
`could not hear a significant amount of the court’s statements and questions. 3
`
`
`
`1 No te: w h ic h wa s a lr ea d y o ve r t h e p a g e li m it a n d I c o mp la in e d in my re sp o n s e I di d no t h ave
`en o u g h t i m e to r es po nd to a ll o f t h ei r po i nt s in o n ly t wo we ek s .
`2 “Ap pl e r ep ea ted ly c la i m ed P la i nt i ff c o n c e de d to it s a r gu m e nt s . [ Re p ly 8 /5 at 4 , 5 , 9, 1 0 , 1 3 ] .
`I c o nc e d e no t h in g . P la i nt if f re sp o nd s to su b st a nt i ve p o i nt s w it h ad di t io na l det a i l h er e in. ”
`P la i nt i ff ’s s up pl e m e nt a l b r i ef a nd o b j ec t i o n s , Dk t . 9 3 at pa g e 6 , ¶ 1 1 . “ P la i nt if f d o e s no t
`ʻc o nc ede’ to wa iv in g he r Sec t io n 6 3 9 9. 7 c la i m .” I d. at p a g e 4 5 , ¶ 1 0 8 . (A u g. 1 8 2 0 24 ) .
`3 “ Th e Co u r t t h e re fo r e d ee m s a ny o p po sit io n wa i ved . A lt h o u g h M s. G j ov i k is a p ro se lit i ga nt ,
`sh e a pp ea r s to h ave a J. D. a nd is t hu s awa re o f t he c o n s eq ue nc e s o f a fa il u re to o pp o s e. A s a
`pr ac t ic a l mat ter, t he Co ur t no te s t h at it s r ul i ng he r e … p reve nt s Ms . G jo v ik f ro m i nc lu di n g t h e
`Administrative Motion & Declaration | - 4 - | 3:23-CV-04597 -EMC
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 6 of 20
`
`
`
`Aug 18. 2 024 Sur -Repl y (Br ief, Object ions , & Proposed Suppleme nt)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Aug 28 2024 Tra nscr ipt at pag es 8-9. (Dkt 1 06) .
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`fac t ua l p r ed ic a te t h at s h e c o m pl a i n ed a b o ut e mp lo yee s' “ r i ght to k no w.” G jo v i k v . A p p l e I n c . ,
`2 3 - c v- 0 4 5 9 7 - EM C , 1 8 ( N. D . Ca l. Oc t . 1 , 2 0 24 )
`Administrative Motion & Declaration | - 5 - | 3:23-CV-04597-EMC
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 7 of 20
`
`
`
`Despite the connection issues, the transcript appeared to show the court
`
`heard me and accepted my arguments – however, based on the Oct. 1 2024
`
`decision, now it is unclear if the cour t heard me at all. 4
`
`Aug 28 2024 Tra nscr ipt at page 1 2. (Dkt 106) .
`
`
`
`
`
`Further, the Section 6399.7 challenge should have been waived under 12( g)
`
`and 12(h), as Apple failed it challenge it in the prior Motion to Dismiss, and thus
`
`I was not required to respond at all under the Fed. R. Civ. Pro., other than to
`
`protest the 12( g) and 12(h) violations, which I did. I also had to waste precious
`
`page limit space in my opposition on protesting that it was not a “new” claim after
`
`the Defendant falsely asserted it was not in my prior complaints.
`
`All of this to say, I believe my Constitutional right to Due Process was violated
`
`at least partially based on the internet connection issues and the severe punishment
`
`of a dismissal with prejudice of critical, core claims in my litigation (at least
`
`partially due to the inability of the cour t to hear my oral arguments ).
`
`The dismissal with dismissals with prejudice of the factual basi s of “right to
`
`know” retaliation, along with the CERCLA retaliation under Section 1102.5, both
`
`
`
`4 “ Th e Co ur t t h er e fo re d ee m s a ny o pp o s it io n w a i ved . A lt h o u g h M s. Gj ov i k is a pr o s e l it i ga nt ,
`sh e a pp ea r s to h ave a J. D. a nd is t hu s awa re o f t he c o n s eq ue nc e s o f a fa il u re to o pp o s e. A s a
`pr ac t ic a l mat ter, t he Co ur t no te s t h at it s r ul i ng he r e … p reve nt s Ms . G jo v ik f ro m i nc lu di n g t h e
`fac t ua l p r ed ic a te t h at s h e c o m pl a i n ed a b o ut e mp lo yee s' “ r i ght to k no w.” G jo v i k v . A p p l e I n c . ,
`2 3 - c v- 0 4 5 9 7 - EM C , 1 8 ( N. D . Ca l. Oc t . 1 , 2 0 24 )
`Administrative Motion & Declaration | - 6 - | 3:23-CV-04597 -EMC
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 8 of 20
`
`due to purely discretionar y reasons, resulted in the equivelent of a death knell for
`
`this lawsuit. (See concurrently filed Motion to Stay pending appeal).
`
`Oct. 1 2024 Decisio n , page 18. (Dkt 1 12) .
`
`
`
`
`
`These claims are important enough to this lawsuit, if the dismissals cannot be
`
`appealed, it would be preferrable to me to start the entire litigation over again from
`
`the start instead of proceeding with gutted claims. If I had known this would have
`
`happened, I would have insisted I attend the hearing in person.
`
`III. REQUESTS
`
`I am filing this administrative motion to correct the record , to ensure the
`
`District Court is aware of these issues (as I will be raising this as part of my Ninth
`
`Circuit appeal – Dkt. 113, 114 ), and with two requests , please.
`
`First, I request clarification if I am no longer able to attend hearings via
`
`Zoom or if I can still attend via Zoom. I would also appreciate if the Defendant
`
`would be subject to the same instructions in order to avoid another ex parte type
`
`situation.
`
`Second, I am requesting a note to be added to the Aug 28. 2024 transcript
`
`and/or docket documenting the reported internet connection issues. As of now,
`
`without further context, the current transcript could potentially denylist me from
`
`future legal opportunities, due to what appeared to be grossly disrespectful
`
`conduct by me in court. However, I had no idea what was happening or being said,
`
`and the issue apparently originated with the cour thouse and/or the court’s Zoom
`
`Administrative Motion & Declaration | - 7 - | 3:23-CV-04597 -EMC
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 9 of 20
`
`instance. I am ver y troubled by all of this and t hat the cause of the issue is not
`
`reflected in the transcript (Dkt. 112) or the minutes. (Dkt. 104). Thank you.
`
`I declare under penalty of perjur y under the laws of the United States that
`
`the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed on October
`
`22 2024 in Boston, Massachusetts.
`
`
`
`Executed on: Oct. 22 2024
`
`
`
`Signature:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Ashley M. Gjovik
`Pro Se Plaintiff
`
`Email: legal@ashleygjovik.com
`Physical Address : Boston, Massachusetts
`Mailing Address: 2108 N St. Ste. 4553 Sacramento, CA, 95816
`Phone: (408) 883-4428
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Administrative Motion & Declaration | - 8 - | 3:23-CV-04597 -EMC
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 10 of 20
`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 10 of 20
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT A
`EXHIBIT A
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 11 of 20
`
`From:
`
`Sent:
`To:
`Subject:
`
`Ashley M. Gjøvik <ashleymgjovik@protonmail.com> <=?utf-8?Q?Ashley_M._Gj=C3
`=B8vik_<ashleymgjovik@protonmail.com>?=>
`Saturday, September 14, 2024 2:57 PM
`EMC CRD
`Re: FW: 3:23-cv-04597-EMC | 8/28 9:30 AM Hearing | Motion to Strike just filed
`
`Thank you, Ms. Galang! I will confirm once Ms. Ayala returns.
`
` —
`
`
`Ashley M. Gjøvik
`BS, JD, PMP
`
`Sent with Proton Mail secure email.
`
`On Saturday, September 14th, 2024 at 12:04 PM, EMC CRD <EMCCRD@cand.uscourts.gov> wrote:
`
`
`Dear Ms. Gjøvik,
`
`
`
`It appears your next hearing for a further case management conference is set for 2/11/2025 at
`2:30 p.m. by Zoom. Please confirm with Ms. Ayala upon her return on Monday, 16, 2024 on
`your appearance for the scheduled Zoom conference.
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully,
`
`Jenny Galang
`
`Relief Courtroom Deputy to
`
`The Honorable Edward M. Chen
`
`
`
`
`
`From: Ashley M. Gjøvik <ashleymgjovik@protonmail.com>
`Sent: Friday, September 13, 2024 4:13 PM
`To: EMC CRD <EMCCRD@cand.uscourts.gov>
`Subject: RE: 3:23-cv-04597-EMC | 8/28 9:30 AM Hearing | Motion to Strike just filed
`
`
`
`
`
`CAUTION - EXTERNAL:
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 12 of 20
`
`Hello Ms. Ayala,
`
`
`
`
`
`I hope you're doing well. I'm so sorry to bother you again.
`
`
`
`I received a copy of the transcripts from this 8/28 hearing and was horrified to see that I was
`interrupting Judge Chen. I could not hear anything during those times and the video was also
`frozen, so I did not think he was speaking. If I knew he was speaking, I would have never
`interrupted him. I also see he asked me to confirm I understood not to interrupt him, but I didn't
`answer him (because I did not hear the request).
`
`
`
`I left you a voicemail today too saying the same and that I want to ask if there is any way to send a
`formally apology to Judge Chen about it and explain what happened. I'm cautious to not file
`anything more to the docket as he seemed clear he didn't want anything else filed at this point - but
`I also feel horrible and am mortified that it appeared I was disrespecting Judge Chen.
`
`
`
`
`Per the transcripts, there were several other exchanges where Judge Chen had asked me a question
`or made a comment that I did not hear related to the substantive matters as well, and it looks like
`no one could hear my response either around that time --- but the interruptions are the biggest
`issue to me. Again, I am so sorry.
`
`
`
`
`Per the transcripts, Judge Chen has also ordered me to fly to SF and appear in person for any future
`hearings. If he tells me to do that, I will borrow money and find a way to do that. (I'm also
`concerned the disruption may have been intentional by non-court staff in the court room and I
`asked an US agency to look into that with the court IT group per your note below - but I don't know
`if they will).
`
`
`
`I also have a question for you, please. At the end of the transcript, Judge Chen seemed to approve
`the next hearing being via Zoom for both parites. But earlier he said I can no longer appear via
`Zoom. Can you please clarify for me so I don't upset him again? Thank you.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Again, I am so sorry.
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 13 of 20
`
`Respectfully,
`
`-Ashley Gjovik
`
` —
`
`
`
`
`
`Ashley M. Gjøvik
`
`BS, JD, PMP
`
`
`
`
`Sent with Proton Mail secure email.
`
`
`
`
`On Friday, August 30th, 2024 at 11:11 AM, EMC CRD <EMCCRD@cand.uscourts.gov> wrote:
`
`Good Morning Ms. Gjovik,
`
`
`
`
`Thank you for your email. This problem has been reported to our
`IT department.
`
`
`
`
`Best regards,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Vicky L. Ayala
`Courtroom Deputy to the Honorable Edward M. Chen
`United States District Court
`Northern District of California
`https://cand.uscourts.gov
`Office: 415-522-2034
`
`
`
`
`
`From: Ashley M. Gjøvik <ashleymgjovik@protonmail.com>
`Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2024 10:20 AM
`To: EMC CRD <EMCCRD@cand.uscourts.gov>
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 14 of 20
`
`Subject: RE: 3:23-cv-04597-EMC | 8/28 9:30 AM Hearing | Motion to Strike just
`filed
`
`
`
`
`
`CAUTION - EXTERNAL:
`
`
`
`
`
`Thank you! I'm so sorry I couldn't hear what the Judge was saying during the
`hearing. I missed a lot of what the Judge said -- the audio completely cut out several
`times.
`
`
`
`I asked a couple people who joined today as attendees and they also said they could
`not hear the Judge most of the time he was speaking to us. I thought you would
`want to know if you have more Zoom meetings today -- there may be an issues with
`the internet connection in the court room since I was not the only one impacted.
`
`
`
`
`Thanks,
`
`-Ashley
`
` —
`
`
`
`
`
`Ashley M. Gjøvik
`
`BS, JD, PMP
`
`
`
`
`Sent with Proton Mail secure email.
`
`
`
`
`On Wednesday, August 28th, 2024 at 12:07 AM, EMC CRD
`<EMCCRD@cand.uscourts.gov> wrote:
`
`Good Evening Ms. Gjovik,
`
`
`
`
`Thank you for your email, I’ve sent your filings to the
`Judge.
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 15 of 20
`
`Best regards,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Vicky L. Ayala
`Courtroom Deputy to the Honorable Edward M. Chen
`United States District Court
`Northern District of California
`https://cand.uscourts.gov
`Office: 415-522-2034
`
`
`
`
`
`From: Ashley M. Gjøvik <ashleymgjovik@protonmail.com>
`Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 5:25 PM
`To: EMC CRD <EMCCRD@cand.uscourts.gov>; CAND EMCpo
`<emcpo@cand.uscourts.gov>
`Subject: 3:23-cv-04597-EMC | 8/28 9:30 AM Hearing | Motion to
`Strike just filed
`
`
`
`
`
`CAUTION - EXTERNAL:
`
`
`
`
`
`Hello,
`
`
`
`I'm so sorry for the last minute filing, but I was only notified today
`that a non-party filed a document to the docket a week ago (it was
`only posted a few hours ago). I drafted a Motion to Strike in
`response as quickly as I could and its now filed under Docket 101.
`The draft Proposed Order is attached. I scheduled it for our Motion
`hearing tomorrow morning at 9:30 AM.
`
`
`
`
`FYI for Ms. Ayala, and also, I just filed a Notice of Pendency for the
`ARB case under Docket 100.
`
`
`
`
`Thank you!
`
`-Ashley
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 16 of 20
`
` —
`
`
`
`
`
`Ashley M. Gjøvik
`
`BS, JD, PMP
`
`
`
`
`Sent with Proton Mail secure email.
`
`CAUTION - EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email originated outside the Judiciary. Exercise caution when opening
`attachments or clicking on links.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CAUTION - EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email originated outside the Judiciary. Exercise caution when opening
`attachments or clicking on links.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CAUTION - EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email originated outside the Judiciary. Exercise caution when opening
`attachments or clicking on links.
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 17 of 20
`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 17 of 20
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT B
`EXHIBIT B
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 18 of 20
`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 18 of 20
`
`.
`Declaration of Stephen Meier
`
`SN-|/.
`fo
`
`:
`
`Pursuunt to 28 U.S.C.8 1746,
`
`|. Stephen Meter, hereby declare as follows:
`
`My name is Stephen Meier,
`
`| make this Deelaration based upon my
`
`personal knowledge and in support of the Plaintiff's Administrative Motion
`
`pertaining to the August 28 2024 hearing,
`
`I have persenal kiowledge of all
`
`fucts stated in this Declaration, undif called to testify. | could and would testify
`
`competently thereto,
`
`On August 28 2074, | viewed and listened the hearing over zoum and was
`
`unable to hear the judwe for several
`
`large sections of the hearing. The audio
`
`transmission was garbled or silent and | was unable to hear
`
`the judge's
`
`statements,
`
`T also noticed that the plaintiff was uppeuring struggling to hear at
`
`the same time which caused confusion and chaos to the proeceding,.
`
`| declare under penalty ofperjury under the laws of the United States that
`
`the foregoing is true and correct and that
`
`this declaration was executed on
`
`October 22, 2024. Tam a long time resident of Sunnyvale California and my
`
`address is $95 Templeton Dr 94087.
`
`Feecuted ou: Octaber 22, 2024
`
`Signature)
`
`i A
`
`
`
`

`

`Page 19 of 20
`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24
`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 19 of 20
`
`—S
`
`EM -2 3
`
`A—-
`
`is/ Stephen F, MeierSN\
`
`Location: Sunnyvale CA
`Email: stevemeters$S3i@yumail,com
`Phone: 408-593-8246
`
`

`

`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 20 of 20
`Case 3:23-cv-04597-EMC Document 116 Filed 10/23/24 Page 20 of 20
`
`SAN-3h
`
`Case 2:23-cv-04597-EMC Document ic4 Filed O8/ZB/24 Page loft
`
`OFFICE OF THE CLERK
`USTITED STATES DISTRICT COURE
`Sorthern —istrict of California
`
`CIVLL SUNETES
`
`Date: Auguer 2s, Mita
`
`Time:dik bik 10
`St) anvittitbes
`
`Judge: FTW ARD M.CHES
`
`Cane Now 3:23-uvt897 EMC
`
`Case Name: Gjovie v. Appie Inc
`
`Piro Se Plaintiff: Ashiey Oyovik
`Attorney for Defendann Melaidla Riccher
`
`Oeputy Clerks Vicky Ayala
`
`Court Reporter: Kelly Slamline
`
`PRUK EEDINGS HELD bY 40}0M WEBISAM
`
`Matien te Diemaiss; Motion to Stike: Imttal Case Management Conferesice — Teht
`
`Parise stated appearances.
`
`SUMMARY
`
`Oral argument presented. Matter subtnitted: onder to issue The Court shail oot aecep any fiber filinge
`related to the motion bo deamine,
`
`The Crntet shail refer the case ti 4 settlement conferences with a magistrate judge (to be held within be
`150) dave}
`
`In addition. the Court shall reqpune the partes bo complete animal divclosuren, However, it temporarily
`stays discovery pending x ruling on Apple's motion bo diaimies.
`fr mvkeu sem to stay discovery
`temporurily ao that the parties will have the benefit of the Court's naling which wil thea inform the «cope
`ef the lingation.
`
`Once the Court miles on Apple's monon ro diaries, then tt shall allowdiscovery to proceed, Dhacovery
`plu! be fimited, fhe the tum bom, 1 “Phang f° discovery — ne. divcuvery naarinely tailoheyt tethat
`heeded sr order for the pares 10 be svlequasrty prepecred for the setttement conference, The Curt does
`not see anged for more than 1-7 depositions per sule for purpusce of Phase | dikcovery Plaintiff
`indicated that eho cannot afford to tuke depositions, that ma decision far her to make Plainiifl carrer
`averd hatvang her deposition maken
`
`Ifthe exse does not settle, then the Court sholl pen dracevery in full
`
`REFERRALS:
`Case referred to Magistrate Jidefie aytilement conference bo be completes! within }20-1TS0 dye
`
`