From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Graifman v. Rend Micro Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION
Nov 9, 2011
CASE NO. 11-CV-02488 RMW (N.D. Cal. Nov. 9, 2011)

Opinion

Case No. 11-CV-02488-RMW

11-09-2011

BRIAN GRAIFMAN, on Behalf of Himself, All Others Similarly Situated, and the General Public, Plaintiff, v. TREND MICRO CORPORATION, and DOES 1 through 10, Inclusive, Defendants.

Timothy J. Burke (SBN 181866) STULL, STULL, & BRODY Gary S. Graifman KANTROWITZ, GOLDHAMER & GRAIFMAN, PC Michael S. Green GREEN & ASSOCIATES, LLC Tod L. Gamlen (SBN: 83458) Irene V. Gutierrez (SBN: 252927) BAKER & McKENZIE LLP Mark D. Taylor (pro hac vice) Matthew McCrary (pro hac vice) BAKER & McKENZIE LLP Attorneys for Defendant TREND MICRO, INCORPORATED (USA) sued herein as TREND MICRO CORPORATION. Attorneys for Plaintiff Brian Graifman


Timothy J. Burke (SBN 181866)

STULL, STULL, & BRODY

Gary S. Graifman

KANTROWITZ, GOLDHAMER &

GRAIFMAN, PC

Michael S. Green

GREEN & ASSOCIATES, LLC

Tod L. Gamlen (SBN: 83458)

Irene V. Gutierrez (SBN: 252927)

BAKER & McKENZIE LLP

Mark D. Taylor (pro hac vice)

Matthew McCrary (pro hac vice)

BAKER & McKENZIE LLP

Attorneys for Defendant

TREND MICRO, INCORPORATED (USA) sued

herein as TREND MICRO CORPORATION.

Attorneys for Plaintiff Brian Graifman

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING NONWAIVER OF PRIVILEGE

STIPULATION

Plaintiff BRIAN GRAIFMAN (including any and all other persons that he may be determined to represent) and Defendant TREND MICRO INCORPORATED, by and through their respective counsel, enter into this Stipulation.

WHEREAS, the parties are engaged in the production and/or exchange of documents, things and electronically stored information;

WHEREAS, each party acknowledge that, while each party is making effort to identify and withhold from production any document, thing or electronically stored information which that party believes is privileged or otherwise legally protected from disclosure, given the volume and nature of material being exchanged, there is a possibility that certain privileged material may be produced inadvertently; and,

WHEREAS, each party intends and desires that any and all such inadvertent productions and/or disclosure not constitute a waiver of any applicable privileges or legal protection from disclosure (collectively referred to as "privilege(s)" or "privileged"), including, but not limited to, privileges and protections based on the attorney client privilege, the attorney work product doctrine, trade secret, confidentiality, and/or privacy.

IT IS THEREFORE STIPULATED as follows:

1. A party who discloses or produces any privileged document, thing or electronically stored information without intending to waive the claim of privilege associated with it may, within ten (10) days after the producing party actually discovers that such inadvertent disclosure or production occurred, amend its discovery response and notify the other party that such document, thing or electronically stored information was inadvertently disclosed or produced and should have been withheld as privileged.

Once the producing party provides such notice to the requesting party, the requesting party must promptly return the specified document, thing and/or electronically stored information and any copies thereof. By complying with this obligation, the requesting party does not waive any right it has to challenge the assertion of privilege and request on order of the court denying such privilege.

IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.

STULL, STULL & BRODY

By: Gary S. Graifman

Attorneys for Plaintiff

BRIAN GRAIFMAN

BAKER & McKENZIE LLP

By: Tod L. Gamlen

Attorneys for Defendant

TREND MICRO, INCORPORATED

(USA) sued herein as TREND MICRO,

CORPORATION

ATTESTATION OF CONCURRENCE BY TOD L. GAMLEN

I, Tod L. Gamlen, hereby attest that I am one of the attorneys for Trend Micro Incorporated (USA), and, as the ECF user and filer of this document, I attest that, pursuant to General Order No. 45(X)(B), concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from Gary S. Graifman, the above signatory.

By: Tod L. Gamlen

ORDER [PROPOSED]

Pursuant to stipulation IT IS SO ORDERED.

____

UNITED DISTRICT COURT JUDGE


Summaries of

Graifman v. Rend Micro Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION
Nov 9, 2011
CASE NO. 11-CV-02488 RMW (N.D. Cal. Nov. 9, 2011)
Case details for

Graifman v. Rend Micro Corp.

Case Details

Full title:BRIAN GRAIFMAN, on Behalf of Himself, All Others Similarly Situated, and…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

Date published: Nov 9, 2011

Citations

CASE NO. 11-CV-02488 RMW (N.D. Cal. Nov. 9, 2011)