1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

MIAMI-DADE DIVISION 

SCANZ TECHNOLOGIES, INC., fka 

EQUITYFEED CORPORATION, A Canadian 

(Quebec) Corporation, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

JEWMON ENTERPRISES, LLC, et al., 

 Defendants. 

Case No. 20-cv-22957 (RNS/EGT) 

DEFENDANTS’ AMENDED NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE 

Defendants JewMon Enterprises, LLC, Timothy Sykes, Millionaire Publishing, LLC, 

Millionaire Media, LLC, StocksToTrade.com, Inc., and Zachary Westphal (collectively, 

“Defendants”) submit this Amended Notice of Compliance pursuant to Magistrate Judge Torres’ 

Order Setting Discovery Procedures, identifying the substance of the discovery disputes to be 

heard on April 15 at 10:30 AM [DE 60]. 

DISPUTE #1: PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 1 

On January 15, 2021, Defendants served their (i) First Set of Interrogatories (the 

“Interrogatories”). Interrogatory No. 1 requires Plaintiff to identify with specificity each trade 

secret it believes Defendants have misappropriated. On March 29, 2021, Plaintiff served its 

amended and restated responses to the Interrogatories (the “Amended Responses”). Plaintiff’s 

Amended Response to Interrogatory No. 1 lists 532 features which can be readily seen on 

Plaintiff’s public website and identifies the underlying “architecture” (as broadly defined in the 

Preliminary Statement of the Amended Responses) of each feature as the trade secret. The 

Amended Response to Interrogatory No. 1 does not provide Defendants notice of what specific 

Case 1:20-cv-22957-RNS Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/12/2021 Page 1 of 6
2 

trade secrets, if any, have allegedly been misappropriated. Plaintiff contends alternatively that (i) 

its response is sufficient, or (ii) Plaintiff cannot identify the trade secrets at issue until Plaintiff 

takes discovery of Defendants’ competing website. 

DISPUTE #2: PLAINTIFF’S TOTAL FAILURE TO PRODUCE EMAIL

On January 15, 2021, Defendants served their First Set of Requests for Production of 

Documents (the “RFPs”). Plaintiff served its initial production and supplemental production in 

response to Defendants’ RFPs on March 15 and March 29, respectively. Plaintiff has not 

produced a single email in this case. Defendants notified Plaintiff, by letter dated March 23, 

2021, that its production was deficient because it failed to include any emails, text messages, or 

other responsive electronic communications. On March 29, 2021, Plaintiff informed Defendants 

(for the first time) that all of Plaintiff’s emails before 2017 are “missing.” Plaintiff claims that 

when Stephan Touizer (Plaintiff’s CEO) attempted to transfer his email from his desktop to a new 

laptop “the process became corrupted. . . and the entirety of all files was corrupted” and that 

“notwithstanding its best attempts, Plaintiff has been unable to restore its data.” During the parties’ 

March 31, 2021 telephonic meet and confer, Plaintiff refused to provide any further information 

regarding this subject including (i) the email addresses Plaintiff used prior to 2017, (ii) the 

technical specifics concerning how Plaintiff’s email was stored, (iii) the identity of other users of 

Plaintiff’s corporate email system, (iv) whether the emails may exist on a server or cloud-based 

storage system, (v) the steps Plaintiff took to recover the “missing” emails, or (vi) whether the 

allegedly corrupted email files still exist. 

Plaintiff has also produced no email for the period 2017 to the present. Plaintiff asserts 

simply that no responsive documents exist. During the parties’ March 31, 2021 telephonic meet 

and confer, Plaintiff refused to discuss its collection or search methodology – including whether 

Case 1:20-cv-22957-RNS Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/12/2021 Page 2 of 6
3 

counsel simply permitted Mr. Touizer to self-select documents for production – on the grounds 

that such information was privileged. 

DISPUTE #3: FAILURE TO PRODUCE “TWEETS” OR OTHER SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS

Plaintiff has failed to produce any public social media statements, such as “tweets,” (i.e.,

Twitter postings) in response to Defendants’ RFP No. 28. There is no question such documents 

exist: Defendants identified a number of Plaintiff’s tweets in Defendants’ motion to dismiss, and 

those same tweets are identified with specificity in Defendants’ RFPs. During the parties’ March 

31, 2021 telephonic meet and confer, Plaintiff failed to provide any explanation for why it has not 

produced these materials. 

DISPUTE #4: PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 2 

Interrogatory No. 2 requires that Plaintiff identify every communication with any 

Defendant concerning the trade secrets identified in the Amended Response to Interrogatory No. 

1, in which Plaintiff informed the recipient that such trade secret information should be considered 

confidential. In response, Plaintiff states that Mr. Touizer “imparted significant trade secret 

information to Timothy Sykes” during “at least five...conversations” between January 2013 and 

April 2015. (Amended Responses at 86). Plaintiff has refused, however, to provide the date of 

any of these conversations, identify which of the 532 alleged trade secrets were discussed during 

each conversation, or disclose what specifically was said about each alleged trade secret. 

Plaintiff also states that Touizer presented “detailed schematics to Mr. Sykes regarding the 

inner-workings of the EquityFeed server-side architectures and compression algorithms” during 

an in-person meeting in Miami and that “[t]he information disclosed through these schematics is 

identical to the information disclosed in each and every one of the schematics produced by Plaintiff 

in this matter responsive to Defendants’ document requests.” (Amended Responses at 86). 

Case 1:20-cv-22957-RNS Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/12/2021 Page 3 of 6
4 

Plaintiff has refused to state when and where this meeting occurred, and Plaintiff also refuses to 

identify the Bates number of the “schematics produced by Plaintiff” that contain information that 

is “identical” to the schematics Touizer allegedly presented to Sykes. 

DISPUTE #5: PLAINTIFF’S PRIVILEGE LOG

Plaintiff served its privilege log on March 29, 2021, which fails to comply with Local Rule 

26.1(e)(2)(B)(ii)(a) because it does not provide “the type of document (e.g., letter or memorandum) 

and, if electronically stored information, the software application used to create it (e.g., MS Word, 

MS Excel).” In addition, to the extent any of the documents listed in the privilege log contain 

attachments, the privilege log is deficient because it fails to separately log those attachments. 

Plaintiff’s position is that its privilege log is complete. 

LOCAL RULE 7.1(A)(3) CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(a)(3)(A), I hereby certify that counsel for the movants have 

conferred with all parties who may be impacted by the relief sought in this application in a good 

faith effort to resolve these issues, but have been unable to do so. 

Dated: April 12, 2021 Respectfully submitted, 

BERGER SINGERMAN LLP 

/s/ Justin B. Elegant

Justin B. Elegant 

Florida Bar No. 0134597 

Sabrina T. Zarco 

Florida Bar No. 1025800 

1450 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1900 

Miami, FL 33131 

Phone: (305) 755-9500 

jelegant@bergersingerman.com 

szarco@bergersingerman.com 

Case 1:20-cv-22957-RNS Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/12/2021 Page 4 of 6
5 

ALSTON & BIRD LLP 

Brett D. Jaffe (admitted pro hac vice) 

Steven R. Campbell (admitted pro hac vice) 

Reade W. Seligmann (admitted pro hac vice) 

90 Park Avenue 

New York, New York 10016-1387 

Phone: 212-210-9400 

brett.jaffe@alston.com 

steven.campbell@alston.com 

reade.seligmann@alston.com 

David S. Frist (admitted pro hac vice) 

One Atlantic Center 

1201 West Peachtree Street 

Suite 4900 

Atlanta, GA 30309-3424 

Phone: 404-881-7000 

david.frist@alston.com 

Attorneys for Defendants Jewmon Enterprises, 

LLC, Timothy Sykes, Millionaire Publishing, 

LLC, and Millionaire Media, LLC 

SQUIRE PATTON BOGGS (US) LLP 

/s/ Raúl B. Mañón

Raúl B. Mañón 

Florida Bar No. 18847 

200 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 4700 

Miami, FL 33131 

Phone: +1 305-577-7000 

raul.manon@squirepb.com 

Gabriel Colwell (admitted pro hac vice) 

555 South Flower Street, 31st Floor 

Los Angeles, CA 90071 

Phone: +1 213-689-5126 

gabriel.colwell@squirepb.com 

Joseph A. Meckes (admitted pro hac vice) 

Case 1:20-cv-22957-RNS Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/12/2021 Page 5 of 6
6 

275 Battery Street, Suite 2600 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Phone: +1 415-954-0201 

joseph.meckes@squirepb.com 

Attorneys for Defendants StocksToTrade.com, 

Inc. and Zachary Westphal

Case 1:20-cv-22957-RNS Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/12/2021 Page 6 of 6