Kihn v. Bill Graham Archives, LLC, 17-cv-05343-YGR. (2018)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20180831985
Visitors: 5
Filed: Aug. 30, 2018
Latest Update: Aug. 30, 2018
Summary: ORDER RE: JOINT DISCOVERY LETTER BRIEF Re: Dkt. No. 76 YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS , District Judge . On August 29, 2018, the Court held a telephonic conference with the parties in the above-captioned case regarding their joint discovery letter brief. (Dkt. No. 76.) For the reasons stated at the conference, the Court ORDERS as follows: • Plaintiffs' requests pertaining to the issues of (A) "Defendants' Unilateral Cut-off of September 14, 2014" and (B) "Defendants[`] Refus[al] to Identify Pot
Summary: ORDER RE: JOINT DISCOVERY LETTER BRIEF Re: Dkt. No. 76 YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS , District Judge . On August 29, 2018, the Court held a telephonic conference with the parties in the above-captioned case regarding their joint discovery letter brief. (Dkt. No. 76.) For the reasons stated at the conference, the Court ORDERS as follows: • Plaintiffs' requests pertaining to the issues of (A) "Defendants' Unilateral Cut-off of September 14, 2014" and (B) "Defendants[`] Refus[al] to Identify Pote..
More
ORDER RE: JOINT DISCOVERY LETTER BRIEF
Re: Dkt. No. 76
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS, District Judge.
On August 29, 2018, the Court held a telephonic conference with the parties in the above-captioned case regarding their joint discovery letter brief. (Dkt. No. 76.) For the reasons stated at the conference, the Court ORDERS as follows:
• Plaintiffs' requests pertaining to the issues of (A) "Defendants' Unilateral Cut-off of September 14, 2014" and (B) "Defendants[`] Refus[al] to Identify Potential Class Members" are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Court SETS a telephonic conference for Friday, September 14, 2018 at 10:00 a.m. in the event these issues remain unresolved. In that context, the parties must file their joint discovery letter brief by close of business on September 12, 2018.
• Plaintiffs' request pertaining to the issue of (C) "Defendants[`] Refus[al] to Identify Prior Lawsuits and Parties Involving Similar Copyright Infringement Claims" is DENIED.
• Plaintiffs' request pertaining to the issue of (D) "Defendants['] Refus[al] to Affirm or Deny That They Obtained Synchronization Licenses for the Musical Works at Issue" is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. If the parties' meet-and-confer efforts with respect to this issue are futile, plaintiffs may file a motion regarding the meaning of the term "synchronization licenses," which the Court will decide as a matter of law.
In addition, plaintiffs' administrative motion to file under seal in part their discovery letter brief (Dkt. No. 75) is GRANTED.
This Order terminates Docket Numbers 75 and 76.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
