Preview
NICOLE PHILLIS (State Bar No. 291266)
nicolephillis@dwt.com
DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP
865 South Figueroa Street, 24th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90017-2566
Telephone: (213) 633-6800
Fax: (213) 633-6899
JEREMY MERKELSON (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
jeremymerkelson@dwt.com
DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP
1301 K Street NW, Suite 500 East
Washington, D.C., 20005
Telephone: (202) 973-4200
Fax: (202) 973-4499
MARINA GRUBER (State Bar No. 271542)
marinagruber@dwt.com
DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP
50 California Street, 23rd Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 276-6500
Fax: (415) 276-6599
Attorneys for Plaintiff TRACE3, LLC
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
TRACE3, LLC, a California limited liability Case No. 23CV415833
company, Assigned to Hon. Sunil R. Kulkarni
Dept. 1
Plaintiff,
TRACE3, LLC’S RESPONSE TO
STACY THOMPSON’S
EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS
SYCOMP A TECHNOLOGY COMPANY, REGARDING SUPPLEMENTAL
INC., a California corporation; TIMOTHY JOINT STATUS REPORT RE
CORDELL, an individual; LILIAN ELIAS, an SPOUSAL PRIVILEGE OBJECTIONS
individual; GEOFFREY PETERSON, an
individual; DEVIN TOMCIK, an individual; [Reply Memorandum; and Supplemental
and DOES 1-10, inclusive, Declaration of Nicole S. Phillis filed
concurrently]
Defendants.
Action Filed: May 12, 2023
TRACE3’S RESPONSE TO THOMPSON EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS REGARDING SUPPLEMENTAL
JOINT STATUS REPORT RE SPOUSAL PRIVILEGE OBJECTIONS
RESPONSES TO EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS
Plaintiff Trace3, LLC hereby responds to third party Stacy Thompson’s objections to the
evidence submitted in support of the Joint Status Report re Spousal Privilege Objections as
follows.
Evidence Thompson Trace3 Response Ruling
Objection
July 7, 2023 Lacks Mr. Kopelev’s declaration lays the
Kopelev foundation foundation for his expert testimony, __ Sustained
Declaration, Exhibit (Evid Code, § which is based on his personal
A at ¶ 13: “Of note, 403) knowledge, including his experience __ Overruled
access to a ‘Tim and expertise, and his forensic
MDF.xlsx’ examination of Stacy Thompson’s
10 document occurred laptop and his access to and
11 on April 7, 2023.” examination of Ms. Thompson’s
Dropbox account records. (7/7/23
12 Kopelev Decl. ¶ 1 [“I have personal
knowledge of the matter set forth
13 herein”], ¶¶ 3–6 & Ex. A-1 [describing
experience and qualifications], Ex. A at
14 ¶¶ 5, 10, 13 [describing examination of
15 Stacy Thompson laptop and Dropbox
account access records]; Ex. A at ¶¶
16 25–27, 29–34 & Exs. 3 & 4 [further
detailing examination of Dropbox
17 records and Thompson laptop, and
attaching web activity history records].)
18 Ms. Thompson provides no explanation
19 for this objection nor identifies any
specific deficiencies in the foundation
20 laid.
Secondary Ms. Thompson fails to explain how
21 evidence rule Evid. Code § 1521 provides grounds to
(Evid. Code § exclude Mr. Kopelev’s expert
22
1521) testimony. It does not. Mr. Kopelev,
23 as an expert who has laid foundation to
obtain and interpret forensic computer
24 records and reach opinions based on
those forensic records, is entitled to
25 opine on those computer records and
history, and such testimony is
26
admissible. In any case, he is not
27 testifying as to the “contents of a
document,” but rather is interpreting
28 and opining based on his forensic
TRACE3’S RESPONSE TO THOMPSON EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS REGARDING SUPPLEMENTAL
JOINT STATUS REPORT RE SPOUSAL PRIVILEGE OBJECTIONS
examination.
Printed Evidence Code § 1552 expressly
representation provides that Mr. Kopelev’s exhibits
requirement reflecting Ms. Thompson’s computer
(Evid. Code § history are admissible here: “A printed
1552) representation of computer information
… is presumed to be an accurate
representation of the computer
information … that it purports to
represent.” (Evid. Code § 1552; see
also Evid. Code § 255 [“If data are
stored in a computer or similar device,
any printout or other output readable by
10 sight, shown to reflect the data
accurately, is an ‘original.’”].) The
11 statute provides that the presumption
may only be rebutted by proffering
12 “evidence” that the computer
information is “inaccurate or
13 unreliable” (Evid. Code § 1552), which
14 Ms. Thompson has failed to do here.
15
DATED: September 19, 2023 AVIS RIGHT REMAINE LLP
16
JEREMY MERKELSON
17 NICOLE S. PHILLIS
MARINA GRUBER
18
By:
19 Nicole S. Phillis
20 Attorneys for Plaintiff TRACE3, LLC
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
TRACE3’S SEVENTH MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO R. CT. 2.550, 2.551
PROOF OF SERVICE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. I am over the age of 18
and not a party to the within action; my business address is 865 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 2400,
Los Angeles, CA 90017.
On September 19, 2023, I served the document described as “TRACE3, LLC’S
RESPONSE TO STACY THOMPSON’S EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS REGARDING
SUPPLEMENTAL JOINT STATUS REPORT RE SPOUSAL PRIVILEGE
OBJECTIONS” upon the interested parties in this action addressed as follows:
Rajiv Dharnidharka Attorneys for Defendant
Jeanette Barzelay SYCOMP A TECHNOLOGY COMPANY, INC.
Micah Chavin
Erin Heiferman
10 DLA Piper
2000 University Ave
11 East Palo Alto, CA 94303
Tel: 650-833-2322
12 Email:
Rajiv.Dharnidharka@us.dlapiper.com
13 Jeanette.barzelay@us.dlapiper.com
Micah.Chavin@us.dlapiper.com
14 Erin.Heiferman@us.dlapiper.com
15 Lyn Agre Attorneys for Individual Defendants
Edward Shapiro TIMOTHY CORDELL, LILIAN ELIAS, GEOFFREY
16 Lesa Libatique (Paralegal) PETERSON, DEVIN TOMCIK
Glenn Agre Bergman & Fuentes
17 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2410
San Francisco, CA 94104
18 Telephone: 415.599.0880
E-Mail: lagre@glennagre.com
19 eshapiro@glennagre.com
llibatique@glennagre.com
20
Megan M. Reilly (Pro Hac Vice) Attorney for Individual Defendants
21 Glenn Agre Bergman & Fuentes LLP TIMOTHY CORDELL, GEOFFREY PETERSON
1185 Avenue of the Americas, 22nd Floor and DEVIN TOMCIK
22 New York, New York 10036-2603
Telephone: (516) 551-4895
23 E-Mail: mreilly@glennagre.com
24 Rod Sorensen Attorneys for third party STACY THOMPSON
303 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 600
25 Redwood City, Ca 94065
Telephone: 650.269.7450
26 rsorensen@SorensenLawGroup.com
27
28
TRACE3’S RESPONSE TO THOMPSON EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS REGARDING SUPPLEMENTAL
JOINT STATUS REPORT RE SPOUSAL PRIVILEGE OBJECTIONS
X (VIA EMAIL) By forwarding a portable document file to the electronic mail address(es)
below from electronic mail address linapearmain@dwt.com, at Suite 2400, 865 South
Figueroa Street, Los Angeles, California.
Executed on September 19, 2023, Los Angeles, California.
X (State) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
above is true and correct.
LINA PEARMAIN
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
TRACE3’S SEVENTH MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO R. CT. 2.550, 2.551
Preview
NICOLE PHILLIS (State Bar No. 291266) nicolephillis@dwt.com DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP 865 South Figueroa Street, 24th Floor Los Angeles, California 90017-2566 Telephone: (213) 633-6800 Fax: (213) 633-6899 JEREMY MERKELSON (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) jeremymerkelson@dwt.com DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP 1301 K Street NW, Suite 500 East Washington, D.C., 20005 Telephone: (202) 973-4200 Fax: (202) 973-4499 MARINA GRUBER (State Bar No. 271542) marinagruber@dwt.com DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP 50 California Street, 23rd Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 276-6500 Fax: (415) 276-6599 Attorneys for Plaintiff TRACE3, LLC SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA TRACE3, LLC, a California limited liability Case No. 23CV415833 company, Assigned to Hon. Sunil R. Kulkarni Dept. 1 Plaintiff, TRACE3, LLC’S RESPONSE TO STACY THOMPSON’S EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS SYCOMP A TECHNOLOGY COMPANY, REGARDING SUPPLEMENTAL INC., a California corporation; TIMOTHY JOINT STATUS REPORT RE CORDELL, an individual; LILIAN ELIAS, an SPOUSAL PRIVILEGE OBJECTIONS individual; GEOFFREY PETERSON, an individual; DEVIN TOMCIK, an individual; [Reply Memorandum; and Supplemental and DOES 1-10, inclusive, Declaration of Nicole S. Phillis filed concurrently] Defendants. Action Filed: May 12, 2023 TRACE3’S RESPONSE TO THOMPSON EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS REGARDING SUPPLEMENTAL JOINT STATUS REPORT RE SPOUSAL PRIVILEGE OBJECTIONS RESPONSES TO EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS Plaintiff Trace3, LLC hereby responds to third party Stacy Thompson’s objections to the evidence submitted in support of the Joint Status Report re Spousal Privilege Objections as follows. Evidence Thompson Trace3 Response Ruling Objection July 7, 2023 Lacks Mr. Kopelev’s declaration lays the Kopelev foundation foundation for his expert testimony, __ Sustained Declaration, Exhibit (Evid Code, § which is based on his personal A at ¶ 13: “Of note, 403) knowledge, including his experience __ Overruled access to a ‘Tim and expertise, and his forensic MDF.xlsx’ examination of Stacy Thompson’s 10 document occurred laptop and his access to and 11 on April 7, 2023.” examination of Ms. Thompson’s Dropbox account records. (7/7/23 12 Kopelev Decl. ¶ 1 [“I have personal knowledge of the matter set forth 13 herein”], ¶¶ 3–6 & Ex. A-1 [describing experience and qualifications], Ex. A at 14 ¶¶ 5, 10, 13 [describing examination of 15 Stacy Thompson laptop and Dropbox account access records]; Ex. A at ¶¶ 16 25–27, 29–34 & Exs. 3 & 4 [further detailing examination of Dropbox 17 records and Thompson laptop, and attaching web activity history records].) 18 Ms. Thompson provides no explanation 19 for this objection nor identifies any specific deficiencies in the foundation 20 laid. Secondary Ms. Thompson fails to explain how 21 evidence rule Evid. Code § 1521 provides grounds to (Evid. Code § exclude Mr. Kopelev’s expert 22 1521) testimony. It does not. Mr. Kopelev, 23 as an expert who has laid foundation to obtain and interpret forensic computer 24 records and reach opinions based on those forensic records, is entitled to 25 opine on those computer records and history, and such testimony is 26 admissible. In any case, he is not 27 testifying as to the “contents of a document,” but rather is interpreting 28 and opining based on his forensic TRACE3’S RESPONSE TO THOMPSON EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS REGARDING SUPPLEMENTAL JOINT STATUS REPORT RE SPOUSAL PRIVILEGE OBJECTIONS examination. Printed Evidence Code § 1552 expressly representation provides that Mr. Kopelev’s exhibits requirement reflecting Ms. Thompson’s computer (Evid. Code § history are admissible here: “A printed 1552) representation of computer information … is presumed to be an accurate representation of the computer information … that it purports to represent.” (Evid. Code § 1552; see also Evid. Code § 255 [“If data are stored in a computer or similar device, any printout or other output readable by 10 sight, shown to reflect the data accurately, is an ‘original.’”].) The 11 statute provides that the presumption may only be rebutted by proffering 12 “evidence” that the computer information is “inaccurate or 13 unreliable” (Evid. Code § 1552), which 14 Ms. Thompson has failed to do here. 15 DATED: September 19, 2023 AVIS RIGHT REMAINE LLP 16 JEREMY MERKELSON 17 NICOLE S. PHILLIS MARINA GRUBER 18 By: 19 Nicole S. Phillis 20 Attorneys for Plaintiff TRACE3, LLC 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 TRACE3’S SEVENTH MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO R. CT. 2.550, 2.551 PROOF OF SERVICE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is 865 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 2400, Los Angeles, CA 90017. On September 19, 2023, I served the document described as “TRACE3, LLC’S RESPONSE TO STACY THOMPSON’S EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS REGARDING SUPPLEMENTAL JOINT STATUS REPORT RE SPOUSAL PRIVILEGE OBJECTIONS” upon the interested parties in this action addressed as follows: Rajiv Dharnidharka Attorneys for Defendant Jeanette Barzelay SYCOMP A TECHNOLOGY COMPANY, INC. Micah Chavin Erin Heiferman 10 DLA Piper 2000 University Ave 11 East Palo Alto, CA 94303 Tel: 650-833-2322 12 Email: Rajiv.Dharnidharka@us.dlapiper.com 13 Jeanette.barzelay@us.dlapiper.com Micah.Chavin@us.dlapiper.com 14 Erin.Heiferman@us.dlapiper.com 15 Lyn Agre Attorneys for Individual Defendants Edward Shapiro TIMOTHY CORDELL, LILIAN ELIAS, GEOFFREY 16 Lesa Libatique (Paralegal) PETERSON, DEVIN TOMCIK Glenn Agre Bergman & Fuentes 17 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2410 San Francisco, CA 94104 18 Telephone: 415.599.0880 E-Mail: lagre@glennagre.com 19 eshapiro@glennagre.com llibatique@glennagre.com 20 Megan M. Reilly (Pro Hac Vice) Attorney for Individual Defendants 21 Glenn Agre Bergman & Fuentes LLP TIMOTHY CORDELL, GEOFFREY PETERSON 1185 Avenue of the Americas, 22nd Floor and DEVIN TOMCIK 22 New York, New York 10036-2603 Telephone: (516) 551-4895 23 E-Mail: mreilly@glennagre.com 24 Rod Sorensen Attorneys for third party STACY THOMPSON 303 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 600 25 Redwood City, Ca 94065 Telephone: 650.269.7450 26 rsorensen@SorensenLawGroup.com 27 28 TRACE3’S RESPONSE TO THOMPSON EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS REGARDING SUPPLEMENTAL JOINT STATUS REPORT RE SPOUSAL PRIVILEGE OBJECTIONS X (VIA EMAIL) By forwarding a portable document file to the electronic mail address(es) below from electronic mail address linapearmain@dwt.com, at Suite 2400, 865 South Figueroa Street, Los Angeles, California. Executed on September 19, 2023, Los Angeles, California. X (State) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct. LINA PEARMAIN 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 TRACE3’S SEVENTH MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO R. CT. 2.550, 2.551