Free Case Management Statement - District Court of California - California

Case 5:07-cv-04834-JF

Document 15

Filed 01/25/2008

Page 1 of 5

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

STEPHEN J. USOZ, SB# 189095 YAMIN T. MAUNG, SB # 253538 HOGAN HOLMES & USOZ LLP 333 West Santa Clara St., Suite 800 San Jose, California 95113 Telephone: 408-292-7600 Attorneys for Plaintiff DARSHANA NADKARNI UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DARSHANA NADKARNI, an individual, Plaintiff, v. DATTAPRASANNA G. NADKARNI. Defendants.

Case No.: C07 04834 JF PLAINTIFF'S CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT Date: Time: Honorable

Plaintiff hereby submits the following as her Case Management Conference Statement pursuant to Civil Local Rule 16-9 and request the court adopt it as its Case Management Order. 1. Jurisdiction and Service: This matter was brought in the United States District Court on September 20, 2007. The Federal Court has jurisdiction of this action under 28 U.S.C. 1331, 1338(a), and (b) and this Court's pendant jurisdiction. Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. 1391 and 1400(a). All parties have been served. 2. Facts: Plaintiff and defendant were previously married. On June 21, 2002, Ms. Nadkarni

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT Case No. C07 04834 JF

Case 5:07-cv-04834-JF

Document 15

Filed 01/25/2008

Page 2 of 5

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

filed for divorce from defendant. The resulting family law case has been contentious. After plaintiff and defendant separated, Ms. Nadkarni established a yahoo e-mail account with the following e-mail address: [email protected] This e-mail was Ms. Nadkarni's personal e-mail account, though which she communicated with her attorney, as well as conducted personal and business affairs. Ms. Nadkarni did not give the defendant her password to this account or give him permission to access this account. On or about August 31, 2007, defendant filed a declaration in the Family Law Action which contained copies of private e-mails from Ms. Nadkarni's yahoo e-mail account. In this declaration, defendant attempts to justify his wrongful access into Ms. Nadkarni's private e-mail account. Later in the same declaration, defendant implicitly threatens to expose other personal information from the e-mail he has wrongfully accessed, including potential harm to unidentified third-parties. Disputed Factual Issues: Plaintiff believes that defendant disputes whether or not he had established the email account at issue or whether he had permission to access and/or utilize the e-mail account at issue. 3. Legal Issues: Whether defendant intentionally accessed without authorization e-mail information which is not his own? Whether Ms. Nadkarni had a legal and reasonable expectation of privacy in her personal yahoo e-mail account? Whether defendant invaded that right by wrongfully accessing her e-mail account and taking personal information from it for his use? Whether Ms. Nadkarni suffered damage as a result of this invasion of privacy? 4. Motions: Plaintiff sought, ex parte, a temporary retraining order and order to show cause seeking to keep defendant from accessing, utilizing and/or otherwise disseminating the

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT Case No. C07 04834 JF

2

Case 5:07-cv-04834-JF

Document 15

Filed 01/25/2008

Page 3 of 5

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

information contained on the e-mail account at issue. The Court declined this request. At this time, Plaintiff is not aware of any motions which may be filed in this action. 5. Amendments of Pleadings: There have been no amendments of pleadings. 6. Evidence Preservation: Plaintiff has taken steps necessary to preserve all evidence which she is aware. 7. Disclosures: No Initial Disclosures have been made as of the date of the filing of this Case Management Statement. The matter just became at-issue with the filing of the Answer by Defendant in late December, 2007. Plaintiff anticipates completing her Initial Disclosures within the next thirty (30) days. 8. Discovery: No discovery has been conducted to date. The parties will initiate discovery after completion of the Initial Disclosures. Plaintiff believe that the discovery rules should govern. Document Requests: Unlimited document production requests are appropriate so long as the requests are narrowly tailored. Interrogatories: Depositions: made for additional depositions. Admissions: 20 admissions per side. June 27, 2008 August 1, 2008 August 22, 2008 September 19, 2008 20 interrogatories per side. 4 depositions per side unless a showing of good cause is

Fact Discovery Cut-off Expert Witness Disclosure Rebuttal Expert Disclosure Expert Discovery Cut-off 9. Class Action: This is not a class action case.

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT Case No. C07 04834 JF

3

Case 5:07-cv-04834-JF

Document 15

Filed 01/25/2008

Page 4 of 5

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 matter.

10.

Related Cases: There is a case pending in the Family Court at Santa Clara County Superior

Court. The case number is 102FL107415. 11. Relief: Plaintiff seeks to enjoin the defendant and all other persons in active concert or privity with him, preliminarily and permanently from directly or indirectly violating her rights to privacy and that all wrongfully obtained information obtained by defendant be returned and/or destroyed. In addition, plaintiff seeks punitive damages against defendant for his wrongful and intentional conduct along with reimbursement for her costs and attorneys fees. 12. Settlement and ADR: Plaintiff believes this matter is appropriate for Early Neutral Evaluation. The parties are in the process of meeting and conferring with regard to ADR. 13. Consent to Magistrate Judge: Plaintiff does not consent to the hearing by a Magistrate Judge. 14. Other References: Plaintiff does not believe that any reference is appropriate in this matter. 15. Narrowing of Issues: Plaintiff is not aware of the ability to narrow any of the issues presented in this

16.

Expedited Schedule: Plaintiff does not believe that this matter can be expedited.

17.

Scheduling: Please see the discovery schedule set forth above. Plaintiff believes that it would

be appropriate for all dispositive motions to be heard no later than October 24, 2008, with a PreTrial Conference to take place November 14, 2008 and Trial to commence on December 1, 2008.

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT Case No. C07 04834 JF

4

Case 5:07-cv-04834-JF

Document 15

Filed 01/25/2008

Page 5 of 5

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

18.

Trial: Plaintiff demanded a trial by jury. Plaintiff anticipates that it will need three (3) to

five (5) days to put on its case. 19. Disclosure of Non-party Interested Entities or Persons: Plaintiff is not aware of any non-party interested entities or persons.

Dated: January 24, 2007

HOGAN HOLMES & USOZ LLP

S/_________________________________ STEPHEN J. USOZ Attorney for Plaintiff

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT Case No. C07 04834 JF

5