Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-01400/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-01400-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1114 Trademark Infringement

---

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 

Case No. C-07-01400 BZ NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR IN 

CAMERA REVIEW; MPA & DECLARATION

KRONENBERGER BURGOYNE, LLP 

Karl S. Kronenberger (CA Bar No. 226112) 

Jeffrey M. Rosenfeld (CA Bar No. 222187) 

Margarita Calpotura (CA Bar No. 244711) 

150 Post Street, Suite 520 

San Francisco, CA 94108 

Telephone: (415) 955-1155 

Facsimile: (415) 955-1158 

Attorneys for Defendant, FUNCTIONAL BRANDS, LLC 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

THRESHOLD ENTERPRISES LTD., a 

Delaware corporation,

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

FUNCTIONAL BRANDS, LLC, a 

Michigan limited liability company; et al., 

 Defendants. 

Case No. C-07-01400 BZ 

NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE 

MOTION AND ADMINISTRATIVE 

MOTION FOR ORDER SEALING 

DOCUMENTS AND GRANTING IN 

CAMERA REVIEW OF THEREOF; 

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND 

AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT 

THEREOF; DECLARATION IN 

SUPPORT THEREOF; [PROPOSED] 

ORDER 

Date: In Chambers 

The Honorable Bernard Zimmerman 

Case 3:07-cv-01400-BZ Document 50 Filed 02/04/08 Page 1 of 7
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 

Case No. C-07-01400 BZ 1 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR IN 

CAMERA REVIEW; MPA & DECLARATION

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR RESPECTIVE COUNSEL OF RECORD: 

 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT pursuant to 79-5 (“Local Rule 79-5”) and the inherent 

authority of the Court to administer justice, Kronenberger Burgoyne, LLP 

(“Kronenberger”), counsel of record for defendant Functional Brands, LLC (“Functional 

Brands”), hereby moves the Court for an order: 1) sealing documents filed by 

Kronenberger Burgoyne, LLP (“Kronenberger”) in support of its Motion to Withdraw as 

Counsel of Record; and 2) granting an in camera review of the sealed documents and/or 

an in camera hearing regarding Kronenberger’s Motion to Withdraw. This Motion is 

necessary to preserve privileged communications between Kronenberger and Functional 

Brands. Such communications describe some of the bases for Kronenberger’s Motion to 

Withdraw as Counsel of Record. 

This Motion is based on Kronenberger’s Memorandum of Points and Authorities 

set forth below; the Declaration of Karl S. Kronenberger in Support of this Motion set forth 

below; and all pleadings on file in this case. 

Dated: January 30, 2008 

 Karl S. Kronenberger 

Henry M. Burgoyne, III 

Jeffrey M. Rosenfeld 

Kronenberger Burgoyne, LLP 

By:_____________/s/_________________

Karl S. Kronenberger 

Attorneys for Functional Brands, LLC 

Case 3:07-cv-01400-BZ Document 50 Filed 02/04/08 Page 2 of 7
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 

Case No. C-07-01400 BZ 2 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR IN 

CAMERA REVIEW; MPA & DECLARATION

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES 

BACKGROUND 

Kronenberger Burgoyne, LLP (“Kronenberger”) has served as counsel of record 

for defendant Functional Brands, LLC (“Functional Brands”) since the inception of this 

lawsuit. Over the past two months, however, certain conflicts have developed between 

Kronenberger and Functional Brands, which make it impossible for Kronenberger to 

continue to represent Functional Brands. As a result, Kronenberger is moving the Court 

to withdraw as Functional Brands’ counsel. 

In support of its Motion to Withdraw, Kronenberger seeks to describe certain 

privileged communications between itself and Functional brands. These communications 

evidence some of the conflicts at issue and provide good cause for Kronenberger’s 

Motion to Withdraw. Accordingly, in order to preserve the sanctity of the attorney-client 

relationship, Kronenberger seeks an order sealing the documents that describe these 

communications and granting an in camera review of these documents and/or an in 

camera hearing of Kronenberger’s Motion to Withdraw. 

ARGUMENT 

 Pursuant to Local Rule 79-5 and the inherent authority of the Court to administer 

justice, Kronenberger seeks an order sealing portions of documents and granting an in 

camera review of these documents, which contain descriptions of privileged 

communications between Kronenberger and Functional Brands. These descriptions, 

contained in Kronenberger’s Memorandum of Points and Authorities in support of its 

Motion to Withdraw and the declaration of Karl S. Kronenberger in support of 

Kronenberger’s Motion to Withdraw, explain the bases for Kronenberger’s Motion to 

Withdraw. 

The Court has the authority to conduct an in camera review of privileged 

documents in order to preserve the attorney-client privilege. See American Nat. Bank 

and Trust Co. of Chicago v. Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of U.S., 406 F.3d 867, 878-79 (7th 

Cir. 2005) (finding that court abused its discretion when it refused to conduct a full in 

Case 3:07-cv-01400-BZ Document 50 Filed 02/04/08 Page 3 of 7
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 

Case No. C-07-01400 BZ 3 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR IN 

CAMERA REVIEW; MPA & DECLARATION

camera inspection of the documents at issue and compelled their disclosure); see also 

U.S. v. Zolin, 491 U.S. 554, 565 (1989) (finding that in camera review may be used to 

determine whether allegedly privileged attorney-client communications fall within crimefraud exception; Beaty v. Stewart, 303 F.3d 975, 989 (9th Cir. 2002) (holding in camera

hearing to evaluate counsel’s motion to withdraw). 

 Without an in camera review of documents evidencing the communications 

between Kronenberger and Functional Brands, Kronenberger cannot provide the Court 

with a complete explanation of the bases for its need to withdraw. If Kronenberger were 

to disclose these communications to the Court through traditional filing procedures, it 

could potentially breach its obligations to preserve the confident of client 

communications. Moreover, the portions of the documents in support of Kronenberger’s 

Motion to Withdraw that contain confidential information are limited in scope, and the in 

camera review of this information will not affect the administration of justice. 

CONCLUSION 

 Based on the foregoing, Kronenberger respectfully requests that the Court issue 

an order sealing portions of Kronenberger’s Memorandum of Points and Authorities in 

support of its Motion to Withdraw as well as the declaration of Karl S. Kronenberger in 

support of Kronenberger’s Motion to Withdraw. Kronenberger also respectfully requests 

that the Court grant an in camera review and/or hearing regarding these documents. 

Kronenberger herewith submits, the entirety of these documents to be filed under 

seal, and the redacted versions to be filed in the public record. 

Dated: January 30, 2008 

 Karl S. Kronenberger 

Henry M. Burgoyne, III 

Jeffrey M. Rosenfeld 

Kronenberger Burgoyne, LLP 

By:_____________/s/_________________

Karl S. Kronenberger 

Attorneys for Functional Brands, LLC 

Case 3:07-cv-01400-BZ Document 50 Filed 02/04/08 Page 4 of 7
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 

Case No. C-07-01400 BZ 4 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR IN 

CAMERA REVIEW; MPA & DECLARATION

DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO SEAL

I, Karl S. Kronenberger declare as follows: 

1. I am an attorney admitted to practice in the State of California and the 

United States District Court for the Northern District of California. I am a partner at the 

law firm of Kronenberger Burgoyne, LLP (“Kronenberger”), counsel of record for 

Defendant Functional Brands, LLC (“Functional Brands”). Unless otherwise stated, I 

have personal knowledge of the facts stated herein. 

2. Portions of Kronenberger’s Memorandum of Points and Authorities in 

support of its Motion to Withdraw as Counsel of Record describe communications 

between Kronenberger and Functional Brands protected by the attorney-client privilege. 

3. Portions of the Declaration of Karl S. Kronenberger in support of 

Kronenberger’s Motion to Withdraw as Counsel of Record describe communications 

between Kronenberger and Functional Brands protected by the attorney-client privilege. 

4. Submitted herewith by manual filing is a true and correct copy of 

Kronenberger’s Memorandum of Points and Authorities in support of its Motion to 

Withdraw as Counsel of Record. 

5. Submitted herewith by manual filing is a true and correct copy of the 

Declaration of Karl S. Kronenberger in support of Kronenberger’s Motion to Withdraw as 

Counsel of Record. 

6. Submitted herewith by electronic filing is a redacted version of 

Kronenberger’s Memorandum of Points and Authorities in support of its Motion to 

Withdraw as Counsel of Record. 

7. Submitted herewith by electronic filing is a redacted version of the 

Declaration of Karl S. Kronenberger in support of Kronenberger’s Motion to Withdraw as 

Counsel of Record. 

Case 3:07-cv-01400-BZ Document 50 Filed 02/04/08 Page 5 of 7
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 

Case No. C-07-01400 BZ 5 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR IN 

CAMERA REVIEW; MPA & DECLARATION

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the 

foregoing is true and correct and that this Declaration was executed this 30th day of 

January 2008, at San Francisco, California. 

 /s/_______________

Karl S. Kronenberger

Case 3:07-cv-01400-BZ Document 50 Filed 02/04/08 Page 6 of 7
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 

Case No. C-07-01400 BZ 6 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR IN 

CAMERA REVIEW; MPA & DECLARATION

PROPOSED ORDER

 Having considered Kronenberger Burgoyne, LLP’s (“Kronenberger”) 

Administrative Motion for Order Sealing Documents and Granting in Camera Review 

Thereof, and good cause having been shown, 

 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Kronenberger’s Motion is GRANTED. 

IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the designated portions of 

Kronenberger’s Memorandum of Points and Authorities in support of its Motion to 

Withdraw as Counsel of Record shall be filed under seal. 

 IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the designated portions of the 

Declaration of Karl S. Kronenberger in support of Kronenberger’s Motion to Withdraw as 

Counsel of Record shall be filed under seal. 

IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED this Court shall conduct an in camera 

review of the above-designated documents and/or an in camera hearing of 

Kronenberger’s Motion to Withdraw as Counsel of Record. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated:___________________ 

HONORABLE BERNARD ZIMMERMAN 

Magistrate Judge, United States District 

Court for the Northern District of California 

2/4/2008

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Bernard Zimmerman

Case 3:07-cv-01400-BZ Document 50 Filed 02/04/08 Page 7 of 7