Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-06124/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-06124-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 18:1836(b) - Civil Action to Protect Trade Secrets

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHAMPION DANIEL MUTHLE,

Plaintiff,

 v.

SAP.IO, SAP GLOBAL, SAP NORTH

AMERICA, ATLAS.IO, RYAN

VAN DYK, and JUN MENG,

Defendants. /

No. C 19-06124 WHA

ORDER RE MOTION TO

ADMINISTER, COMPEL,

QUASH, AND STRIKE AND

SETTING HEARING DATE

Pro se plaintiff Champion Daniel Muthle requested discovery from defendant SAP.io

Fund, L.P. in November 2019 (Dkt. No. 54-1). Three days after receiving plaintiff’s discovery

request, SAP sent a letter to plaintiff declining to comply with the request (Dkt. No. 54-2). 

Plaintiff now moves to compel discovery (Dkt. No. 57). The Court orders SAP to produce the

following documents:

1. Any and all documents in SAP’s possession, custody, or control

showing that SAP plausibly brought any pressure or duress upon plaintiff,

leading up to and including the execution of the settlement and release

agreement.

2. Any and all emails and correspondences between SAP and its

representatives, on one hand, and plaintiff and his representatives, on the other,

leading up to the settlement and release agreement.

Case 3:19-cv-06124-WHA Document 59 Filed 11/22/19 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

3. Any and all internal memorandums and emails to file that

summarize or describe communications between SAP and its representatives, on

one hand, and plaintiff and his representatives, on the other.

If SAP makes any privilege claims for any of the foregoing, then a privilege log must be

supplied. Discovery is due to plaintiff by DECEMBER 2, 2019 BY NOON. If SAP is expected to

win on the motion for summary judgment, it would be well advised for SAP to comply with this

Court’s order for discovery. Except for the foregoing, all of plaintiff’s requests for discovery are

hereby quashed because they are unduly burdensome and overbroad. The hearing on the

summary judgment motion is hereby set for JANUARY 23, 2020 AT 8:00 AM. 

Plaintiff’s further motion to quash this Court’s orders staying the briefing schedule for

plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and converting the dismissal motion to SAP’s summary

judgment motion is DENIED, as is his motion to strike the settlement and release agreement (Dkt.

Nos. 49, 50).

SAP then filed an administrative motion requesting the following: (1) stay proceedings

other than those related to SAP’s converted motion for summary judgment pending resolution;

(2) strike plaintiff’s second opposition to SAP’s converted motion for summary judgment or

grant SAP leave to file an additional reply; and (3) prohibit plaintiff from filing new motions

until after resolution of SAP’s converted motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 58). 

First, given the above stated, SAP’s request for proceedings be stayed is DENIED AS MOOT. 

Second, this Court accepts plaintiff’s second opposition and hereby GRANTS SAP leave to file

an additional reply by DECEMBER 2, 2019 BY NOON. No more replies may be submitted with

the exception that the discovery order by the Court provides discovery relevant to the motion

for summary judgment, then the parties may make supplemental submissions to highlight such

discovery. Lastly, instead of granting the full extent of relief sought by SAP, this order requests

plaintiff Muthle to not file additional motions until SAP’s summary judgment motion is

determined unless plaintiff feels the motion is necessary for proper resolution of SAP’s pending

summary judgment motion.

Case 3:19-cv-06124-WHA Document 59 Filed 11/22/19 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

3

Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, is advised that helpful information is available online

at http://cand.uscourts.gov/proselitigants and also in person at the legal help center. An

appointment with the legal help center may be made by calling 415-782-9000, extension 8657. 

The Court encourages plaintiff to pursue legal help.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 22, 2019. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:19-cv-06124-WHA Document 59 Filed 11/22/19 Page 3 of 3