Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_17-cv-06520/USCOURTS-cand-4_17-cv-06520-10/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:101 Copyright 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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RITA C HO,

Plaintiff,

v.

MARK PINSUKANJANA, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 17-cv-06520-PJH 

ORDER ADOPTING IN PART

MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT 

AND RECOMMENDATION

Re: Dkt. No. 122

The court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Thomas S. Hixson's Report and 

Recommendation Re: Motion for Sanctions. Dkt. 122 (the “R&R”). The court has 

received no objections and the deadline to file such objections has now passed. The 

court finds the report correct, well-reasoned and thorough. The court ADOPTS the R&R

IN PART, and ORDERS as follows: 

1) The court ADOPTS the R&R’s first recommendation and DENIES plaintiff’s 

request for termination sanctions. 

2) The court ADOPTS the R&R’s second recommendation and extends the 

discovery deadline for the limited purpose of allowing defendants to fully 

comply with Judge Hixson’s February 20, 2019 discovery order, see Dkt. 90, 

and to allow plaintiff to take defendants’ supplemental depositions. Defendants 

SHALL produce all responsive documents no later than 10 days from the date 

of this order. Any supplemental depositions SHALL be completed no later than 

30 days from the date of this order. 

3) The court ADOPTS the R&R’s third recommendation and DENIES plaintiff’s 

request for evidentiary sanctions. 

4) Defendants are hereby WARNED that any further failure to comply with their 

Case 4:17-cv-06520-PJH Document 133 Filed 06/07/19 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

discovery obligations or court orders may result in the court awarding 

evidentiary or case-dispositive sanctions. 

5) The court ADOPTS the R&R’s fourth recommendation and GRANTS plaintiff’s 

request for attorneys’ fees in the amount of $12,275.25; and 

6) The court DECLINES TO ADOPT the R&R’s fifth recommendation. In light of 

the warning above and the possibility of further sanctions, including terminating 

sanctions, the court declines to hold defendants in contempt. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 7, 2019

_________________________________

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

United States District Judge

Case 4:17-cv-06520-PJH Document 133 Filed 06/07/19 Page 2 of 2