1 KEKER & V AN NEST, LLP
JEFFREY R. CHANIN - #103649
2 DARALYN J. DUR - #169825
ASHOK RAANI - #200020
3 710 Sansome Street
San Francisco, CA 94111-1704
4 Telephone: (415) 391-5400
Facsimile: (415) 397-7188
5
Attorneys for Plaintiff
6 NETFLIX, INC.
7
8
9
10
11
UNTED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
NETFLIX, INC., a Delaware corporation,
Plaintiff,
12
13
v.
BLOCKBUSTER, INC., a Delaware
14 corporation, DOES 1-50,
15 Defendant,
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
AN RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS
Case No. C 062361 WHA
PLAINTIFF NETFLIX'S
MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATIVE
REQUEST TO FILE A SURRPL Y TO
PARTIES' JOINT STATEMENT AND
(PROPOSED) ORDER
Complaint fied: April
4, 2006
Date: TBD
Time: TBD
Dept: Courtroom A, 15th Floor
Judge: Hon. Joseph C. Spero
. PLAINTIFF'S MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATIVE REQUEST TO FILE A SURRPLY TO PARTIES'
JOINT STATEMENT AND (PROPOSED) ORDER
CASE NO. C 06 2361 WHA
Case 3:06-cv-02361-WHA Document 53 Filed 10/03/2006 Page 1 of 10
:
-
-
-
t 6
il
/4/
f
Netflix, Inc. v. Blockbuster, Inc.
Doc. 56
Dockets.Justia.com
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
PlaintiffNetflx, Inc. moves the Court, under Civil Local Rule 7-11, to permit Netflx to
file a sureply-which Netflx has attached-to the Parties' Joint Statement. The Cour "may
permit the filing of a surreply at its discretion," and should permit the filing when "the pary
making the motion would be unable to contest matters presented to the court for the first time in
the opposing party's reply." Groobert v. President & Dirs. o/Georgetown Coil., 219 F. Supp.
2d 1, 13 (D.D.C. 2002) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).
Netflx and Defendant Blockbuster, Inc. ("Blockbuster") agreed to submit a
joint
submission on the proposed Protective Order, each exchanging initial and reply statements
simultaneously. One ofthe disputed issues is whether in-house counsel should be entitled to
review materials designated "Attorneys Eyes Only"-Neflix says no, Blockbuster sa