Free Case Management Statement - District Court of California - California

Case 3:07-cv-05026-MHP

Document 19

Filed 12/27/2007

Page 1 of 6

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

GILL SPERLEIN (172887) 584 Castro Street, Suite 849 San Francisco, California 94114 Telephone: (415) 378-2625 Facsimile: (415) 252-7747 [email protected]

Attorney for Plaintiff IO GROUP, INC.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) CASE NO.: 07-5026 (MHP) ) ) ) PLAINTIFF'S CASE MANAGEMENT ) STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER ) ) ) ) Date: 1/7/2007 ) Time: 4:00 p.m. ) Location: Ctrm 15, 18th Floor

IO GROUP, INC., a California corporation, Plaintiff, vs. GILBERT MICHAEL GONZALES, an individual; and DOES 1-21, individuals, Defendants.

Plaintiff submits this Case Management Statement. Filing a Joint Case Management Conference Statement is not possible for the following reason. This matter involves one named Defendant, Gilbert Michael Gonzales, whom Plaintiff served, but who has failed to serve an answer or other responsive pleading. Plaintiff has filed with the Court Clerk a request for entry of default as to this defendant. The complaint also lists twenty-one (21) Doe Defendants. This Court previously granted plaintiff's motion to take early discovery for the purpose of identifying the unknown defendants. For detailed information regarding the progress of plaintiff's efforts to identify the Doe Defendants, see Paragraph 5 infra.

-1-

C-07-5026 (MHP) Case Management Statement and Proposed Order

Case 3:07-cv-05026-MHP

Document 19

Filed 12/27/2007

Page 2 of 6

1 2 3 4

DESCRIPTION OF THE CASE 1. A brief description of the events underlying the action: Plaintiff claims to own rights to certain photographic images and audiovisual works which plaintiff claims defendants willfully copied, displayed and distributed by and through

5 6 7 8 9 10

Internet websites in violation of Federal Copyright Laws. 2. The principle factual issues which the parties dispute: The only named defendant has failed to respond to the Summons and Complaint and plaintiff has yet to identify and serve the remaining Doe Defendants. Plaintiff is unaware of defendants' positions.

11 12 13 14 15

3.

The principle legal issues which the parties dispute: The only named defendant has failed to respond to the Summons and Complaint and plaintiff has yet to identify and serve the remaining Doe Defendants. Plaintiff is unaware of defendants' positions.

16 17 18 19 20 21

4.

The other factual issues which remain unresolved for the reason stated below and how the parties propose to resolve those issues: The only named defendant has failed to respond to the Summons and Complaint and plaintiff has yet to identify and serve the remaining Doe Defendants. Plaintiff is unaware of defendants' positions.

22 23 24 25 26 27

5.

The parties which have not been served and the reasons: Plaintiff served Defendant Gilbert Michael Gonzales a Summons and a copy of the Complaint, but Gonzales failed to serve an answer or other responsive pleading. Plaintiff has filed with the Clerk of the Court a request to enter default as to Defendant Gonzales. Plaintiff intends to dismiss fourteen (14) of the defendants currently

28

identified as Does. Of the remaining seven (7) defendants currently identified as
-2-

C-07-5026 (MHP) Case Management Statement and Proposed Order

Case 3:07-cv-05026-MHP

Document 19

Filed 12/27/2007

Page 3 of 6

1 2 3

Does, plaintiff has identified three (3) and believes it will identify three of the remaining four (4) by approximately January 3, 2008. Plaintiff will most likely identify the final Doe Defendant by approximately January 15, 2008. Once

4 5 6 7 8 9

plaintiff has identified the remaining four (4) defendants, Plaintiff will seek to amend the Complaint dismissing the defendants who have settled and adding the true name of any defendant who has been identified but with whom Plaintiff has not reached a settlement agreement. Once the Complaint has been amended, plaintiff will cause it to be served upon each defendant identified in the amended

10 11 12 13 14

complaint. Barring any effort to evade service of process, Plaintiff believes it will be able to identify and serve all remaining defendants with an amended complaint by February 15, 2008. 6. The additional parties which the below-specified parties intend to join and the intended time frame for such joinder: Plaintiff Io Group, Inc. does not intend to join any parties, but will substitute the true legal names of certain Doe Defendants. 7. The following parties consent to assignment of this case to a United States Magistrate Judge for trial. This matter was not assigned to a Magistrate Judge.

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION 8. Plaintiff filed a Notice of Need for ADR Phone Conference with an explanation that identification of the defendants is ongoing. 9. Please indicate any other information regarding ADR process or deadline.

-3-

C-07-5026 (MHP) Case Management Statement and Proposed Order

Case 3:07-cv-05026-MHP

Document 19

Filed 12/27/2007

Page 4 of 6

1 2 3

DISCLOSURES 10. The parties certify that they have made the following disclosures: In light of the default of Defendant Gonzales and fact that the remaining defendants have yet

4 5 6 7 8 9

to be identified, parties have not yet made initial disclosures. DISCOVERY 11. The parties agree to the following discovery plan: In light of the default of Defendant Gonzales and fact that the remaining defendants have yet to be identified, parties have not yet agreed to a discovery plan.

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

TRIAL SCHEDULE 12. The parties request a trial date as follows: In light of the default of Defendant Gonzales and fact that the remaining defendants have yet to be identified, parties have not yet agreed to a trial schedule. 13. The parties expect that the trial will last for the following number of days: Plaintiff believes a trial, if necessary, will last 1 to 3 days.

Dated: December 27, 2007

/s/ Gill Sperlein GILL SPERLEIN COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF IO GROUP, INC.

CASE MANAGEMENT [PROPOSED] ORDER Having considered Plaintiff's Case Management Conference Statement and finding good cause, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that Plaintiff shall have until February 15, 2007 to identify all Defendants, Amend the Complaint and serve Summonses and Copies of the Amended Complaint on all Defendants.
-4-

C-07-5026 (MHP) Case Management Statement and Proposed Order

Case 3:07-cv-05026-MHP

Document 19

Filed 12/27/2007

Page 5 of 6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a further case Management Conference will be held on ________________________. Fourteen days prior to the Case Management Conference, parties shall meet and confer re initial disclosures, early settlement, ADR, process and discovery plan. Seven days prior to the Case Management Conference, Parties shall file a Rule 26(f) report, complete initial disclosures or state objection in Rule 26(f) Report and file a Joint Case Management Statement. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall serve a copy of this order on each defendant with the Summons and Amended Complaint, in addition to any other documents required to be served under Rules of this Court. [ IT IS FURTHER ORDERED:

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

The Court may wish to make additional orders, such as: a. Referral of the parties to court or private ADR process; b. Schedule a further Case Management Conference; c. Schedule the time and content of supplemental disclosures; d. Specially set motions; e. Impose limitations on disclosure or discovery; f. Set time for disclosure of identity, background and opinions of experts; g. Set deadlines for completing fact and expert discovery; h. Set time for parties to meet and confer regarding pretrial submissions; i. Set deadline for hearing motions directed to the merits of the case; j. Set deadline for submission of pretrial material; k. Set date for pretrial conference; l. Set a date and time for trial. ] Dated:___________________________ _____________________________ United States District Judge MARILYN HALL PATEL

-5-

C-07-5026 (MHP) Case Management Statement and Proposed Order

Case 3:07-cv-05026-MHP

Document 19

Filed 12/27/2007

Page 6 of 6

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

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I am over 18 years of age, am employed in the county of San Francisco, at 69 Converse Street, San Francisco, California, 94110 in the office of a member of the Bar of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. I am readily familiar with the practice of this office for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with United Parcel Service and correspondence is deposited with United Parcel Service that same day in the ordinary course of business. Today I served the attached:
· PLAINTIFF'S CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT

by causing a true and correct copy of the above to be placed in United Parcel Service at San Francisco, California in a sealed envelope with postage prepaid, addressed as follows: Gilbert Michael Gonzales 66640 Granada Avenue Desert Hot Springs, CA 61867 United States District Court 450 Golden Gate Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102 e-filing Chambers Copy Io Group, Inc. v. Gonzales, C-07-5026 (MHP) I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed on December 27, 2007. /s/ Steve Azbell Steve Azbell I hereby attest that this is the declaration of Steve Azbell and the original with Steve Azbell's holographic signature is on file for production for the Court if so ordered, or for inspection upon request by any party. Pursuant to the laws of the United States, I declare under penalty of perjury the foregoing is true and correct. Dated: December 27, 2007 /s/ Gill Sperlein GILL SPERLEIN, Counsel for Plaintiff Io Group, Inc.

-1-