Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-00798/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-00798-107/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 470
Nature of Suit: Civil (Rico)
Cause of Action: 18:1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LOOP AI LABS INC,

Plaintiff,

v.

ANNA GATTI, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-00798-HSG (DMR)

ORDER ON ALMAWAVE'S MOTION 

FOR SANCTIONS RE PLAINTIFF’S 

DOCUMENT PRODUCTION

Re: Dkt. No. 584

Defendant Almawave USA, Inc. (“Almawave”) filed a motion for sanctions based on 

Plaintiff Loop AI Labs Inc.’s alleged failure to comply with the court’s March 10 and March 21, 

2016 orders to make its document production available to all parties on a disk or via Dropbox 

(Docket Nos. 465, 501). [Docket No. 584.] In its opposition, Plaintiff represents that it has 

complied with the court’s orders and made its entire production “available several times” and that 

on or around April 8, 2016, it “handed . . . in person” to Almawave’s counsel a USB drive 

containing Plaintiff’s “entire production” of documents. [Docket No. 588.]

This court has previously noted the parties’ lamentable discovery conduct, which has 

consumed an unjustifiable amount of court resources. [See, e.g., Docket Nos. 271, 465; see also

Docket No. 415 (Feb. 5, 2016 Order by Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam).] The parties have inundated 

the court with discovery motions due to their inability to resolve even the most basic discovery 

disputes without court intervention. Accordingly, the court has been forced to attempt to triage 

and prioritize the discovery motions, and for that reason is presently deferring consideration of 

sanctions motions that do not impact the merits of the parties’ overall claims and defenses. While

it appears that Plaintiff has remedied any deficiencies in its document production, Almawave’s 

motion for sanctions could impact the pending summary judgment motions because it asks the 

court for an order prohibiting Plaintiff from introducing at trial or summary judgment any 

Case 4:15-cv-00798-HSG Document 778 Filed 07/04/16 Page 1 of 2
2

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

documents that were not provided via Dropbox as of March 21, 2016, among other things. 

Therefore, the court orders the following: if, in connection with its opposition to the pending 

summary judgment motions, Plaintiff attempts to rely on documents that were not provided to 

Defendants via Dropbox or on a disk by April 8, 2016, Almawave may file a statement

identifying any such documents and setting forth the reasons why the documents should have been 

made available to Defendants via Dropbox or on a disk by April 8, 2016. Almawave shall file any 

such statement with its reply brief in connection with its motion for summary judgment. The court 

will provide further instructions to Plaintiff as appropriate.

The court defers consideration of sanctions for Plaintiff’s alleged failure to comply with 

the court’s March 10 and March 21, 2016 orders.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 4, 2016

______________________________________

Donna M. Ryu

United States Magistrate Judge

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Donna M. Ryu

Case 4:15-cv-00798-HSG Document 778 Filed 07/04/16 Page 2 of 2