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
1 This disposition is not designated for publication and may not be cited.
Case No. C 06-2057 JF (RS)
ORDER RE GOOGLE MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
(JFLC1)
**E-Filed 1/22/2007**
NOT FOR CITATION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN JOSE DIVISION
KINDERSTART.COM, LLC, on behalf of itself
and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.
GOOGLE INC.,
Defendant.
Case Number C 06-2057 JF (RS)
ORDER1 RE MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS
[re: docket no. 60]
Defendant Google Inc. (“Google”) moves for sanctions under Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 against
KinderStart.Com, LLC (“KinderStart”) and its counsel Gregory J. Yu (“Yu”). Google asserts
that three types of allegations in KinderStart’s operative Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”)
are sanctionable: (i) allegations that Google skews its search results and reserves top placement
for entities that compensate Google; (ii) allegations that Google represents that it will always
display a notice when it removes a listing from its search results, but does not do so; and (iii)
allegations that Google removes certain websites from its search engine results and lowers
PageRanks for political and religious reasons. Google Motion 1-2.
Case 5:06-cv-02057-JF Document 83 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 1 of 4
Kinderstart.Com, LLC v. Google, Inc.
Doc. 83
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
2
Case No. C 06-2057 JF (RS)
ORDER RE GOOGLE MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
(JFLC1)
KinderStart provides Yu’s declaration in opposition to the motion. Yu describes his
investigation preceding the filing of the SAC. Specifically, Yu declares that
[t]he allegations in the SAC that a top search listing was guaranteed by Google in
exchange for consideration are indeed supported by investigation by me prior to
the filing of the SAC on September 1, 2006.