Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-md-02843/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-md-02843-28/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Personal Injury

---

KUTSCHER DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF FACEBOOK’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION

CASE NO. 3:18-MD-02843-VC

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP

Orin Snyder (pro hac vice) 

osnyder@gibsondunn.com

200 Park Avenue

New York, NY 10166-0193

Telephone: 212.351.4000

Facsimile: 212.351.4035

Kristin A. Linsley (SBN 154148)

klinsley@gibsondunn.com

Martie Kutscher (SBN 302650)

mkutscherclark@gibsondunn.com

555 Mission Street, Suite 3000

San Francisco, CA 94105-0921

Telephone: 415.393.8200

Facsimile: 415.393.8306

Attorneys for Defendant Facebook, Inc.,

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP

Deborah Stein (SBN 224570)

dstein@gibsondunn.com

333 South Grand Avenue

Los Angeles, CA 90071-3197 

Telephone: 213.229.7000

Facsimile: 213.229.7520

Joshua S. Lipshutz (SBN 242557)

jlipshutz@gibsondunn.com

1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.

Washington, DC 20036-5306

Telephone: 202.955.8500

Facsimile: 202.467.0539

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

IN RE: FACEBOOK, INC. CONSUMER 

PRIVACY USER PROFILE LITIGATION,

This document relates to:

ALL ACTIONS

CASE NO. 3:18-MD-02843-VC

DECLARATION OF MARTIE 

KUTSCHER IN SUPPORT OF 

FACEBOOK, INC.’S OPPOSITION TO 

PLAINTIFFS’ ADMINISTRATIVE 

MOTION

Case 3:18-md-02843-VC Document 432 Filed 05/14/20 Page 1 of 6
1

KUTSCHER DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF FACEBOOK’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION 

CASE NO. 3:18-MD-02843-VC

I, Martie Kutscher, hereby declare as follows:

1. I am an associate at the law firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, counsel of

record for Facebook in the above-captioned matter. I am a member in good standing of the State

Bars of California, New Jersey, and New York. I submit this declaration in support of

Facebook’s Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Administrative Motion requesting that the Court enter its

proposed “Participating Counsel Order.” I make this declaration on my own knowledge, and I

would testify to the matters stated herein under oath if called upon to do so.

2. On January 30, 2020, Lesley Weaver, counsel for Plaintiffs, emailed Facebook’s

counsel Plaintiffs’ proposed Participating Counsel Order, requesting that Facebook inform

Plaintiffs of any “objections” it had to the proposed order.

3. On February 8, 2020, I emailed Plaintiffs’ counsel a draft of the Participating

Counsel Order that incorporated Facebook’s proposed revisions, indicating that Plaintiffs’ had

Facebook’s authorization to file that version of the proposed order. A true and correct copy of

Facebook’s proposal is attached as Exhibit A. 

4. On February 18, I received an email from Cari Laufenberg, also counsel for

Plaintiffs, attaching a revised version of Plaintiffs’ Proposed Counsel order, which largely

rejected the revisions incorporated in Facebook’s February 8 proposal. 

5. I responded to Ms. Laufenberg’s email on February 24, 2020, stating: “We have

reviewed your further revisions to the participating counsel order, which remove much of the

additional language we added. We believe the language we added is necessary and do not agree

to these further revisions. We are happy to meet and confer as necessary to discuss.” 

6. Plaintiffs did not respond to my February 24 email or make any effort to meet and

confer regarding their proposed Participating Counsel Order. We did not hear about the

proposed order again, until April 13, when Plaintiffs filed their Administrative Motion asking the

Court to enter the proposed order that Ms. Laufenberg attached to her February 18 email.

7. The parties in this action exchange a very high volume of correspondence. By

way of example, since the March 5 Case Management Conference before the Court, the parties

Case 3:18-md-02843-VC Document 432 Filed 05/14/20 Page 2 of 6
2

KUTSCHER DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF FACEBOOK’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION 

CASE NO. 3:18-MD-02843-VC

have exchanged more than 130 emails and 30 formal letters. The majority of this

correspondence was sent by Plaintiffs. I regularly receive correspondence from at least eleven

individuals associated with Co-Lead Counsels’ law firms, including: Lesley Weaver, Derek

Loeser, Matthew Montgomery, Anne Davis, Cari Laufenberg, David Ko, Benjamin Gould,

Angelic Ornelas, Kelsey Robertson, Sarah Skaggs, and William Nervis. 

8. Plaintiffs have provided Facebook a proposed deposition protocol for this action,

which, among other things, includes the following language: “Absent extraordinary

circumstances, questioning of a deponent in these MDL Proceedings shall be conducted by no

more than two examiners.” Plaintiffs have also proposed that the parties take video depositions

in this action. 

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

foregoing is true and correct. Executed on April 17, 2020 in Palo Alto, California. 

 /s/ Martie Kutscher 

 Martie Kutscher

Case 3:18-md-02843-VC Document 432 Filed 05/14/20 Page 3 of 6
EXHIBIT A 

Case 3:18-md-02843-VC Document 432 Filed 05/14/20 Page 4 of 6
[PROPOSED] ORDER 1 MDL NO. 2843

CASE NO. 18-MD-02843-VC

Derek W. Loeser (admitted pro hac vice)

KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.

1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3200

Seattle, WA 98101

Tel.: (206) 623-1900

Fax: (206) 623-3384

dloeser@kellerrohrback.com

Lesley E. Weaver (SBN 191305)

BLEICHMAR FONTI & AULD LLP

555 12th Street, Suite 1600

Oakland, CA 94607

Tel.: (415) 445-4003

Fax: (415) 445-4020

lweaver@bfalaw.com

Plaintiffs’ Co-Lead Counsel

Additional counsel listed on signature page

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN RE: FACEBOOK, INC. CONSUMER 

PRIVACY USER PROFILE LITIGATION

MDL No. 2843

Case No. 18-md-02843-VC

This document relates to:

ALL ACTIONS

[PROPOSED] ORDER APPROVING 

PARTICIPATING COUNSEL 

PERFORMING COMMON BENEFIT 

WORK RELATED TO PLAINTIFFS’ 

RESPONSES TO DISCOVERY

Judge: Hon. Vince Chhabria

Courtroom: 4, 17th Floor

Before the Court is Co-Lead Counsel’s request to engage other certain named Plaintiffs’ 

retained counsel (“Participating Counsel”) to perform Common Benefit Work related to 

responding to Defendants’ written discovery to named Plaintiffs and anticipated depositions of 

named Plaintiffs, in accordance with Pretrial Order No. 8: Duties and Authority of Co-Lead 

Counsel, Dkt. 120, ¶ 17 and Pretrial Order No. 9: Protocol for Common Benefit Work and 

Expenses, Dkt. 121. Defendants do not object to this request.

Participating Counsel specifically consists of the following firms: Cohen Milstein Sellers 

& Toll PLLC; Gustafson Gluek PLLC; Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP; Motley Rice LLC; 

Case 3:18-md-02843-VC Document 432 Filed 05/14/20 Page 5 of 6
[PROPOSED] ORDER 2 MDL NO. 2843

CASE NO. 18-MD-02843-VC

Schonbrun Seplow Harris Hoffman & Zeldes, LLP; Sulaiman Law (Atlas Consumer Law); and 

Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP.

The Court APPROVES the request, subject to the following requirements. Co-Lead 

Counsel may authorize Participating Counsel to assist in: (a) responding to Defendants’ 

discovery requests for their clients; and (b) representing their clients in depositions, together with 

Co-Lead Counsel, subject to the limitation that only one attorney may object and conduct any 

direct examination during the course of such depositions. Such Participating Counsel may not 

perform Common Benefit Work other than that specifically requested by Co-Lead Counsel that 

is related to either (a) or (b) as set forth above. All work shall conform to the requirements for 

Common Benefit Work set forth in Pretrial Order No. 9, Dkt. 121. Participating Counsel’s 

receipt of reasonable common benefit attorneys’ fees and reimbursement of costs and expenses 

shall be subject to Section I of Pretrial Order No. 9, Dkt 121. As required by Pretrial Order No. 

8, Dkt. 120, Co-Lead Counsel will: (a) manage and oversee the work of Participating Counsel; 

(b) sign all court filings and responses to discovery requests in accordance with the requirements 

of Rule 11; (c) ensure proper preservation, collection, and production of documents in response 

to any document demands, consistent with all applicable rules of procedure and ethical rules; (d) 

collect cost and time records from Participating Counsel; and (e) ensure that Participating 

Counsel’s work adheres to the Court-approved protocol regarding attorneys’ fees, expenses, and 

costs. Co-Lead Counsel is solely responsible for all case-related correspondence, email, and 

phone communications with Defendants. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: _________________________

THE HONORABLE VINCE CHHABRIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 

4816-0446-7377, v. 2

Case 3:18-md-02843-VC Document 432 Filed 05/14/20 Page 6 of 6