From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Laatz v. Zazzle, Inc.

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Aug 28, 2024
22-cv-04844-BLF (VKD) (N.D. Cal. Aug. 28, 2024)

Opinion

22-cv-04844-BLF (VKD)

08-28-2024

NICKY LAATZ, Plaintiff, v. ZAZZLE, INC., et al., Defendants.


ORDER FOLLOWING REVIEW OF IN CAMERA DOCUMENTS

Virginia K. DeMarchi United States Magistrate Judge

As directed by the Court, on August 22, 2024 Zazzle submitted for in camera review the 14 documents identified in the Court's August 15, 2024 order. See Dkt. No. 256. Having reviewed these documents, the Court concludes that some of Zazzle's privilege claims are not supported by its privilege log or its prior briefing. See Dkt. No. 236. Rather, these redactions have been applied to factual statements and/or to communications that have only a business purpose, and none of them seek or reveal legal advice. Other privilege claims are valid and supported. The Court finds no evidence supporting Ms. Laatz's contention that the crime-fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege applies to any of the redacted or withheld documents.

The Court summarizes its specific findings below:

Log No.

Bates Number

Privilege Claim

Privilege Applies?

1

ZAZZLE-003054

Email thread reflecting and/or seeking the legal advice of counsel regarding font licensing

B. Beaver email (5/4/17, 2:52 p.m.)

Yes - redaction ok

M. Alkhatib email (5/4/17 @ 2:50 p.m.)

No

B. Beaver email (5/4/17 @ 2:44 p.m.)

No

M. Alkhatib email (5/4/17 @ 2:43 p.m.)

No

L. Larson email (5/4/17 @ 2:40 p.m.)

Yes - redaction ok

B. Beaver email (5/4/17 @ 14:37)

Yes - redaction ok

M. McGhie email (5/3/17 @ 12:43 p.m.)

Yes - redaction ok

4

ZAZZLE-003065

Email thread reflecting and/or seeking the legal advice of counsel regarding font licensing

K. Liu email (1/18/17 @ 12:11:26 p.m.)

Yes - redaction ok

C. Sheu email (11/9/16 @ 5:33 p.m.)

Yes - first redaction ok No - second redaction

5

ZAZZLE-003068

Email thread reflecting and/or seeking the legal advice of counsel regarding font licensing

B. Beaver email (11/9/16 @ 11:33:40 a.m.

No

C. Sheu email (11/8/16 @ 3:19 p.m.)

Yes - redaction ok

181

ZAZZLE-003230

Attachment. Email thread reflecting and/or seeking the legal advice of counsel regarding font licensing

L. Larson email (5/4/17 @ 12:02 p.m.)

Yes - redaction ok

K. Liu email (5/4/17 @

Yes - redaction ok

15:17)

I. Pashchenko (5/4/17 @ 2:48 p.m.)

Yes - redaction ok

M. Alkhatib email (5/4/17 @ 2:42 p.m.)

No

L. Larson email (5/4/17 @ 2:40 p.m.)

Yes - redaction ok

B. Beaver email (5/4/17 @ 14:37)

Yes - redaction ok

M. McGhie email (5/3/17 @ 12:43 p.m.)

Yes - redaction ok

240

ZAZZLE-004335

Email thread reflecting and/or seeking the legal advice of counsel regarding font licensing

Yes - redaction ok

254

ZAZZLE-003391

Email reflecting and/or seeking the legal advice of counsel in response to the threat of litigation from Laatz

No

260

ZAZZLE-003525

Email reflecting and/or seeking the legal advice of counsel in response to the threat of litigation from Laatz

No

270

ZAZZLE-003651

Email thread reflecting and/or seeking the legal advice of counsel regarding font licensing and in response to the threat of litigation from Laatz

M. McGhie email (8/26/20 @ 2:47:09 p.m.)

Yes - redaction ok

L. Larson email (5/4/17 @ 12:02 p.m.)

Yes - redaction ok

K. Liu email (5/4/17 @ 15:17)

Yes - redaction ok

I. Pashchenko (5/4/17 @ 2:48 p.m.)

Yes - redaction ok

M. Alkhatib email (5/4/17 @ 2:42 p.m.)

No

L. Larson email (5/4/17 @ 2:40 p.m.)

Yes - redaction ok

B. Beaver email (5/4/17 @ 14:37)

Yes - redaction ok

M. McGhie email (5/3/17 @ 12:43 p.m.)

Yes - redaction ok

271

ZAZZLE-003657

Email thread reflecting and/or seeking the legal advice of counsel regarding font licensing

C. Sheu email (11/9/16 @ 5:33 p.m.)

Yes - first redaction ok No - second redaction

272

ZAZZLE-003661

Email thread reflecting and/or seeking the legal advice of counsel regarding font licensing

Yes - withholding ok

273

ZAZZLE-003662

Attachment. Document reflecting mental impressions and/or legal conclusions of counsel regarding font licensing

Yes - redaction ok

462

ZAZZLE-003959

Messages reflecting and/or seeking the legal advice of counsel in response to the threat of litigation from Laatz

No

611

ZAZZLE-004068

Messages reflecting and/or seeking the legal advice of counsel in response to the threat of litigation from Laatz

Yes - redaction ok

663

ZAZZLE-004537

Document reflecting the legal advice of counsel regarding font licensing

New Fonts (Sept 2017) table, col. G & note to cell A106

Yes - redaction ok

Final Purchasing List table, cell D4

No

Final Purchasing List table, cols. E, M

Yes - redaction ok

Because the Court has found no evidence that the crime-fraud exception to the attorneyclient privilege applies to any of the redacted or withheld documents reviewed in camera, an evidentiary hearing on that issue is unnecessary. See In re Napster, Inc. Copyright Litigation, 479 F.3d 1078, 1093 (9th Cir. 2007) (party seeking to preserve privilege has right to introduce countervailing evidence following in camera review before court orders disclosure based on application of crime-fraud exception). Otherwise, the Court has already afforded Zazzle an opportunity to elaborate upon and file declarations in support of its privilege claims, and the Court has considered that material in making the determinations summarized above. See Dkt. Nos. 236, 236-1, and supporting exhibits.

Accordingly, the Court concludes that no further proceedings are necessary to resolve the parties' dispute regarding these 14 privilege log entries. Zazzle shall produce to Ms. Laatz the documents corresponding to Entries 1, 4, 5, 181, 254, 260, 270, 271, 462 and 663, with revised redactions conforming to the Court's determinations regarding application of the privilege, no later than September 11, 2024.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Laatz v. Zazzle, Inc.

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Aug 28, 2024
22-cv-04844-BLF (VKD) (N.D. Cal. Aug. 28, 2024)
Case details for

Laatz v. Zazzle, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:NICKY LAATZ, Plaintiff, v. ZAZZLE, INC., et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: Aug 28, 2024

Citations

22-cv-04844-BLF (VKD) (N.D. Cal. Aug. 28, 2024)