Opinion
13 Civ. 7060 (CM) (KHP)
03-21-2022
MARVIN PEARLSTEIN, Individually And On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. BLACKBERRY LIMITED formerly known as RESEARCH IN MOTION LIMITED, THORSTEN HEINS, BRIAN BIDULKA, and STEVE ZIPPERSTEIN, Defendants.
ORDER
McMahon, J.:
The Court, for its rulings on the admissibility of trial exhibits, decides as follows:
A. JOINT EXHIBITS
All entries on the parties' joint exhibit list (Dkt #791-3, which is appended to this order as Exhibit A) are admitted into evidence.
B. PLAINTIFFS' EXHIBITS
1. The following Plaintiffs' exhibits are admitted into evidence without objection:
• PX-011 • PX-013 • PX-015 • PX-021 • PX-022 • PX-023 • PX-028 • PX-030 • PX-032 • PX-033 • PX-036 • PX-037
• PX-038 • PX-040 • PX-041 • PX-042 • PX-043 • PX-044 • PX-047 • PX-057 • PX-058 • PX-059 • PX-062 • PX-072
• PX-075 • PX-079 • PX-081 • PX-082 • PX-085 • PX-092 • PX-093 • PX-094 • PX-096 • PX-097 • PX-099 • PX-100
• PX-101 • PX-102 • PX-103 • PX-105 • PX-108 • PX-110 • PX-111 • PX-112 • PX-115 • PX-117 • PX-119 • PX-121 • PX-126 • PX-130 • PX-132 • PX-135 • PX-136 • PX-138 • PX-140 • PX-141 • PX-142 • PX-143 • PX-144 • PX-145 • PX-147 • PX-148 • PX-150 • PX-153 • PX-154 • PX-157 • PX-158 • PX-167 • PX-169 • PX-172 • PX-175 • PX-177 • PX-180 • PX-181 • PX-184 • PX-185 • PX-186 • PX-187 • PX-188
• PX-190 • PX-191 • PX-192 • PX-193 • PX-195 • PX-196 • PX-198 • PX-199 • PX-202 • PX-204 • PX-205 • PX-208 • PX-209 • PX-210 • PX-211 • PX-212 • PX-213 • PX-217 • PX-218 • PX-219 • PX-222 • PX-223 • PX-224 • PX-225 • PX-226 • PX-227 • PX-228 • PX-229 • PX-230 • PX-231 • PX-232 • PX-237 • PX-238 • PX-239 • PX-241 • PX-244 • PX-245 • PX-252 • PX-258 • PX-259 • PX-260 • PX-261 • PX-265
• PX-269 • PX-274 • PX-276 • PX-278 • PX-279 • PX-282 • PX-283 • PX~284 • PX-286 • PX-287 • PX-290 • PX-29l • PX-292 • PX-293 • PX-294 • PX-295 • PX-296 • PX-297 • PX-298 • PX-299 • PX-300 • PX-301 • PX-302 • PX-303 • PX-304 • PX-305 • PX-306 • PX-307 • PX-309 • PX-311 • PX-313 • PX-314 • PX-319 • PX-326 • PX-327 • PX-328 • PX-336 • PX-337 • PX-338 • PX-339 • PX-340 • PX-343 • PX-354 • PX-357
• PX-359 • PX-366 • PX-367 • PX-368 • PX-369 • PX-371 • PX-372 • PX-373 • PX-376 • PX-378 • PX-380 • PX-381 • PX-390 • PX-391 • PX-392 • PX-394 • PX-396 • PX~397 • PX-404 • PX-405 • PX-407 • PX-410 • PX-414 • PX-419 • PX-422 • PX-431 • PX-438 • PX-440 • PX-443 • PX-445 • PX-447 • PX-451 • PX-454 • PX-456 • PX-457 • PX-458 • PX-459 • PX-461 • PX-463
• PX-464 • PX-465 • PX-466 • PX-467 • PX-468 • PX-469 • PX-472 • PX-473 • PX-475 • PX-476 • PX-483 • PX-484 • PX-486 • PX-487 • PX-488 • PX-489 • PX-492 • PX-495 . • PX-499 • PX-501 • PX-502 • PX-505 • PX-507 • PX-509 • PX-511 • PX-512 • PX-514 • PX-515 • PX-518 • PX-519 • PX-520 • PX-521 • PX-522 • PX-523 • PX-524 • PX-526 • PX-527 • PX-528 • PX-529
• PX-530 • PX~532 • PX-533 • PX-534 • PX-536 • PX-537 • PX-538 • PX-539 • PX-540 • PX-541 • PX-542 • PX-543 • PX-544 • PX-545 • PX-546 • PX-547 • PX-554 • PX-556 • PX-559 • PX-571 • PX-572 • PX-575 • PX-576 • PX-580 • PX-581 • PX-585 • PX-586 • PX-587 • PX-589 • PX-590 • PX-591 • PX-594 • PX-596 • PX-598 . PX-600 • PX-601 • PX-602 • PX-603
2. The following Plaintiffs' exhibits are admitted into evidence over Defendants' objections:
• PX-020 • PX-031 • PX-048 • PX-054 • PX-061 • PX-064 • PX-065 • PX-066 • PX-067 • PX-069 • PX-074 • PX-084 • PX-098 • PX-106 • PX-109 • PX-118 • PX-120 • PX-122 • PX-123 • PX-124 • PX-125 • PX-127 • PX-128 • PX-129 • PX-131 • PX-133 • PX-134 • PX-137 • PX-139 • PX-146 • PX-149 • PX-151 • PX-152 • PX-155 • PX-156 • PX-159 • PX-160 • PX-161
• PX-163 • PX-164 • PX-165 • PX-166 • PX-168 • PX-170 • PX-173 • PX-174 • PX-176 • PX-182 • PX-200 • PX-201 • PX-207 • PX-215 • PX-220 • PX-221 • PX-233 • PX-236 • PX-240 • PX-242 • PX-243 • PX-246 • PX-247 • PX-247a • PX-248 • PX-249 • PX-250 • PX-251 • PX-253 • PX-254 • PX-255 • PX-257 • PX-263 • PX-266 • PX-267 • PX-270 • PX-271 • PX-272
• PX-275 • PX-277 • PX-280 • PX-281 • PX-285 • PX-288 • PX-310 • PX-315 • PX-316 • PX-317 • PX-318 • PX-320 • PX-321 • PX-325 • PX-329 • PX-330 • PX-331 • PX-332 • PX-333 • PX-334 • PX-335 • PX-341 • PX-342 • PX-344 • PX-346 • PX-347 • PX-348 • PX-349 • PX-350 • PX-351 • PX-352 . PX-355 • PX-356 • PX-358 • PX-360 • PX-361 • PX-362 • PX-363
• PX-364 • PX-365 • PX-374 • PX-375 • PX-377 • PX-379 • PX-383 • PX-384 • PX-388 • PX-393 • PX-398 • PX-399 • PX-402 • PX-406 • PX-408 • PX-409 • PX-411 • PX-412 • PX-413 • PX-415 • PX-417 • PX-418 • PX-420 • PX-421 • PX-423 • PX-424 • PX-425
• PX-426 • PX-427 • PX-428 • PX-429 • PX-430 • PX-434 • PX-435 • PX-437 • PX-439 • PX-442 • PX-444 • PX-446 • PX-448 • PX-449 • PX-452 • PX-453 • PX-455 • PX-460 • PX-462 • PX-470 • PX-474 • PX-477 • PX-479 • PX-480 • PX-481 • PX-490 • PX-493 • PX-494
• PX-496 • PX-497 • PX-498 • PX-503 • PX-504 • PX-506 • PX-508 • PX-513 • PX-516 • PX-517 • PX-531 • PX-548 • PX-550 • PX-552 • PX-555 • PX-557 • PX-558 • PX-560 • PX-561 • PX-562 • PX-569 • PX-578 • PX-583 • PX-584 • PX-588 • PX-592 • PX-593 • PX-597 • PX-599
3. All objections listed in Defendants' letter to the Court dated March 18, 2021 and the attachment labeled "Defendants' Preserved Objections to Plaintiffs' Exhibits" (Dkt. No. 794-3) are preserved.
4. PX-566: The Court reserves its ruling on Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 566 - the "PCAOB Report" on the 2013 inspection of Ernst & Young LLP - until the parties provide the Court with additional information.
5. Any of Plaintiffs' proposed exhibits that are not specifically mentioned in this Order have been withdrawn. (See Dkt. No. 791-2).
C. DEFENDANTS'EXHIBITS
At the final pretrial conference on March 14, 2022, Plaintiffs informed the Court that they were withdrawing their objections to all of Defendants' exhibits listed at Docket Number 792-1, except for the following, as to which the Court rules:
1. DX-164, DX-167, and DX-295 are Ernst & Young internal documents to which Plaintiffs raise a hearsay objection. The objection is sustained; the exhibits are not admitted.
To the extent Defendants' expert looked at these documents and relied on these documents, he can testify about this reliance, and of course the documents can be used to cross examine the expert. However, the documents will not come into evidence.
2. DX-045, DX-046, DX-048, DX-050, DX-153, DX-158, and DX-163 are BlackBerry internal documents bearing an Ernst & Young stamp. Plaintiffs raise a hearsay objection to the stamp only. The objection is sustained. For the documents to be admitted, the stamp must be redacted.
Note I applies to these documents as well.
3. DX-152, DX-168, DX-169, DX-170, DX-181, DX-184, DX-185, DX-186, DX-188, DX-189, and DX-190 are each Ameritrade Statements of the Lead Plaintiffs. For the reasons stated on the record, Plaintiffs' objections are overruled. These documents are admitted.
4. DX-193 and DX-194 are Ameritrade profiles for the Lead Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs object on hearsay, relevance and prejudice grounds. The objections are sustained. The documents may, however, be used for impeachment.
5. DX-192 is a printout of the Twitter feed for the Lead Plaintiff Mr. Cox's website https://twitter.com/winningstockpix. Plaintiffs object on relevance and prejudice grounds. The objections are overruled. The document is admitted.
6. DX-273 is a printout of the website of Lead Plaintiff Mr. Cox, WinningStockPix.com. Plaintiffs object on grounds of insufficient authentication and relevance. The objections are overruled. The document is admitted.
7. DX-257 is a Verizon document; it was not the subject of questioning at any deposition, and so has not yet been authenticated. Plaintiffs object on the grounds of authenticity and hearsay. Ruling reserved; it is possible that one of the trial witnesses, Mr. Dietel, will solve the problems by authenticating the document and establishing that it is a Verizon business record.
8. DX-269 is a document containing interrogatory responses. The Court does not admit pleadings, but of course it can be used to impeach and may be admissible in part as a prior inconsistent statement if that occurs.
9. DX-334 is a document containing references to a 2014 SEC investigation. In accordance with the Court's in limine order (Dkt. No. 790), Defendants have agreed to redact those references. With redaction, the document is admitted.
10. DX-337, DX-338, and DX-339 are pleadings, which have apparently been marked solely for identification. Pleadings are not admitted.
11. The remainder of Defendants' exhibits listed at Docket Number 792-1 are admitted without objection.
D. DEPOSITION TESTIMONY: RULINGS ON OBJECTIONS
The Court, for its rulings on Plaintiffs' objections to Defendants' deposition designations, decides as follows:
Defendants' Affirmative Designations of Martin Lundie
Defendants' Designation
Plaintiffs' Objection
Ruling
43:22-44:5
Leading
Sustained
45:9-16
Leading
Overruled
64:3-11
Leading
Not preserved - overruled
69:5-12
Leading
Sustained
75:14-19
Leading
Overruled
239:8-16
Leading
Sustained
245:6-15
Leading
Sustained
253:15-21
Leading
Overruled
256:4-10
Leading
Not preserved - overruled
256:11 -17
Leading
Sustained
256:20 - 24
Leading
Sustained
257:10-258:3
Leading
Overruled
Defendants' Affirmative Designations of Paul Camino
Defendants' Designation
Plaintiffs' Objection
Ruling
255:12-21
Leading
Overruled
258:12-259:7
401, 402, 403
Overruled
Defendants' Affirmative Designations of Carlo Chiarello...
Defendants' Designation
Plaintiffs' Objection
Ruling
213:8-13
Leading
Sustained
213:14-24
Leading
Sustained
215:21-216:5
Leading
Sustained
Defendants' Affirmative Designations of Tory Luelo
Defendants' Designation
Plaintiffs' Objection
Ruling
191:6-12
Leading
Sustained
Defendants' Counter Designations of Roddy Hjort
Defendants' Designation
Plaintiffs' Objection
Ruling
50:22 - 23
Optional Completeness (add 50:23 -25)
Sustained, add 50:23 - 25
108:19-109:8
Optional Completeness (add 108:17-18)
Sustained, add 108:17-18
110:17-21
Optional Completeness (add 110:16-17)
Sustained, add 110:16-17
117:20-119:7
Optional Completeness (add 117:19-20)
Sustained, add 117:19-20
Defendants' Counter Designations of Kevin Sweeney
Defendants' Designation
Plaintiffs' Objection
Ruling
89:9-90:4
Optional Completeness (add 90:5-6)
Sustained, add 90:5-6
As reflected in the Final Pretrial Conference transcript and the record, Defendants have withdrawn their objections to Plaintiffs' deposition designations in light of this Court's in limine order. (See Dkt. Nos. 790, 791-1, 793). The Defendants, by letter dated March 18, 2022, list the objections they preserve for the record. (See Dkt. Nos. 794, 794-2). These objections are preserved.
E. TIME FOR EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES:
The parties have submitted to the Court estimates of the time that they believe is needed for the examination of witnesses. The estimates approximate 36 hours for plaintiffs and 24 hours for defendants at the high end, which totals 60 hours. At six hours of testimony each trial day, this amount of questioning would consume ten full trial days, though I know we will have a couple of shorter days (certainly on April 13 and 14).
I commend the parties on their hard work in paring down this case to its essentials. I will permit 60 hours of witness questioning (including deposition testimony), to be divided at 35 hours for plaintiffs and 25 hours for defendants. Allowing for slippage, I expect to be done with testimony no later than April 28, and hopefully a couple of days earlier than that. I plan to charge the jury no later than May 2, and hopefully at the end of the preceding week. This allows us to give the jurors a realistic estimate of the time required for trial and will, I hope, facilitate jury selection.
[EXHIBIT A Omitted]