doyle lowther llp › media › 2503165 › declaration_of… · kelly a. mcdaniel paralegal $250...

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

DECLARATION OF DEBORAH S. DIXON, ESQ. IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES, COSTS AND INCENTIVE AWARDS

William J. Doyle II (SBN 188069) John Lowther (SBN 20700) Christopher W. Cantrell (SBN 290874) DOYLE LOWTHER LLP 4400 NE 77th Avenue, Suite 275 Vancouver, WA 98662 Telephone: (360) 818-9320 Facsimile: (360) 450-3116 John H. Gomez (SBN 171485) Deborah S. Dixon (SBN 248965) GOMEZ TRIAL ATTORNEYS 655 West Broadway Suite1700 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 237-3490 Facsimile: (619) 237-3496 Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the proposed class

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, CENTRAL DIVISION

ANTHONY SHAMRELL and DARYL RYSDYK, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs,

vs.

APPLE, INC.,

Defendant.

))))))))))) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case No. 37-2013-00055830-CU-PL-CTL CLASS ACTION DECLARATION OF DEBORAH S. DIXON IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES, COSTS, AND INCENTIVE AWARDS Judge: Hon. Ronald L. Styn Dept.: C-74 Date: March 20, 2020 Time: 2:00 p.m. Filed: July 2, 2013

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

DECLARATION OF DEBORAH S. DIXON, ESQ. IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES, COSTS AND INCENTIVE AWARDS -1-

I, Deborah S. Dixon, declare:

1. I am an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of California, and I am counsel for

Plaintiffs Anthony Shamrell and Daryl Rysdyk and the putative class members (“Plaintiffs”). I have

personal knowledge of the facts set forth in this declaration.

Gomez Trial Attorneys’ Work On Behalf of the Class

2. Our office filed a Notice of Association of Counsel on October 27, 2015. (ROA #363.)

We were retained in October 2015. Since that time, we have worked extensively on behalf of the class

to obtain class certification and defend the extensive challenges to the claims and maintain the rights of

the class members and relief for them.

3. On April 14, 2017, this Court appointed John Gomez and myself as Class Counsel as

part of the first class certification order. Since that time, we have diligently represented the class and

prepared for trial, which was scheduled for October 25, 2019. These claims were settled within weeks

of trial.

4. I was the primary attorney at Gomez Trial Attorneys handling this case and working

nearly daily on prosecuting the claims. We were hired following rounds of challenges to the pleadings

and after the Fourth Amended Complaint was filed. Immediately we began reviewing the allegations,

the discovery to date and the Court’s orders on the claims, including limiting the timing of the

warranty claims to one year and three years, respectively. From October 2015 through September

2019, we completed the following: (a) reviewed discovery responses and voluminous documents

produced, over 4,000,000 documents by Apple alone; (b) researched and developed legal theories for

the class; (c) developed the scope and breadth of the class and analyzed class certification elements as

part of several rounds of briefing on motions for class certification; (d) prepare for and participated in

meetings and developed case strategy; (e) prepared and responded to written discovery and subpoenas;

(f) prepared for and defended percipient and expert depositions; (g) prepared motion papers for

discovery motions; (h) opposed motion for summary judgment (i) prepared for hearings on motions for

class decertification (j) prepared motions and oppositions to motions to strike experts before this court;

(k) prepared draft jury instructions, verdict forms, motions in limine and draft Trial Readiness

Conference report, as necessary before settlement was finalized; (l) engaged in extensive negotiations

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


and settlement discussions, including attending mediation and post-mediation negotiations carefully

reviewing and negotiating the settlement and editing settlement language; (m) communications and

meetings among the parties and counsel; and (n) prepared preliminary approval papers, as well as

attending hearing on same. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a true and correct copy of the full Register

of Actions from the San Diego Superior Court website.

5. During more than six years of litigation, the parties have filed and opposed 20 major

motions, issued 32 separate written discovery requests between the parties, 14 third-party subpoenas,

36 depositions, and retained 11 expert witnesses. Apple produced nearly 4 million pages of discovery

throughout the six years of litigation in response to Plaintiffs’ discovery demands, which Class

Counsel reviewed individually. The parties completed discovery, including expert discovery regarding

the merits of Plaintiffs’ claims and the amount of restitution and damages at issue. In total, 11 experts

were deposed, most of them on multiple occasions, and the depositions occurred all over the United

States.

6. Following the last round of expert depositions, the parties had fully briefed Sargon

challenges to experts, where Apple filed a separate challenge to each of Plaintiffs’ five trial experts and

Plaintiffs challenged two of Apple’s testifying experts. The parties were actively preparing for trial

when the case settled, including having completed initial rounds of drafting and editing jury

instructions, and meeting and conferring on same, drafting and editing the Joint Trial Readiness

Conference report, including identifying witnesses, statement of the case and had initially discussed

proposed stipulations and motions in limine. Plaintiff independently conducted mock trials/focus

groups in preparation for trial, which ultimately assisted in the settlement negotiations.

7. Apple’s counsel were more than capable and competently defended Apple through

years of litigation. Apple contested notice of the defect, but it also disputed the alleged severity of the

defect and always asserted that every consumer had a free warranty repair option negating any

damages. In addition, Apple contested the methodology and calculation of Plaintiffs’ damages theory,

the diminution of value of the Class iPhones. Apple vigorously defended against the allegations and

attacked the nature of the theory of damages presented. Not only did Apple’s experts deny the

existence of the class and the defect, but also denied that the class suffered damages at all.

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


8. Apple’s counsel were always cordial and professional, but vigorously defended the

case. There were no disputes that either side can claim were not warranted or fully briefed. Neither

Apple’s counsel, nor Class Counsel, engaged in meritless discovery tactics or unnecessary disputes.

Both counsel engaged in significant meet and confer efforts throughout the pendency of the case, and

if a dispute arose to the level of motion practice, it was because of a legitimate disagreement on the law

or facts and not for any improper basis. In fact, the parties had a final discovery hearing, following

fully briefing discovery motions, before the Discovery Referee, Judge May, on September 10, 2019,

just days before a settlement was reached and the parties were still actively preparing for trial.

9. The parties engaged in settlement negotiations prior to class certification in 2016 and

again after class certification in 2017, completing multiple mediation sessions with Judge Gonzalez

(Ret.). These significant efforts did not result in a settlement. On August 30, 2019, the parties

reengaged in settlement discussions and a settlement was finally reached on September 18, 2019,

following weeks of intense settlement discussions and negotiations while preparing for trial.

10. I was the primary and lead attorney negotiating directly with Apple’s counsel to reach

the settlement in this case. The Settlement Agreement in this case was negotiated extensively over

multiple weeks.

Gomez Trial Attorneys Experience and Rates

11. I, as well as John Gomez and Gomez Trial Attorneys, have been attorneys of record for

numerous actions in various California Superior Courts and the U.S. Federal Courts in the Southern

District. Specifically, Gomez Trial Attorneys has been in leadership positions and lead counsel in

many complex and multi-district litigation cases. See Exhibit 2 attached hereto, Gomez Trial

Attorneys Firm Resume.

12. My firm is uniquely qualified to litigate this type of class action and be designated as

trial counsel for the class. I, along with John Gomez of my firm, have litigated and tried other class

actions relating to federal and state laws governing defective products, including statutory and

warranty claims, as well as equitable claims. We completed a three-week federal class action jury trial

in September 2015 before Central District Court Judge Gee (12-cv-1150-DMG-MANx). See also

Ex. 2. We completed a multiple week state court class action jury trial in May 2016 before this Court

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


(37-2011-00091935-CU-CD-CTL) relating to a statutory defect claim. In addition, my firm has

extensive experience handling complex consumer class actions and settling multiple class actions, two

of which were approved by the Southern District within the last two years (Judge Bashant case

numbers 3:09-CV-02109-BAS-MDD and 3:12-cv-00376-BAS-JAB), and one of which was approved

by this Judge Wohlfeil in 2018 (Krinsk v. Monster Beverage Corp., et al, case number 37-2014-

00020192-CU-BT-CTL). Based on that experience and the circumstances in this case, the Settlement

Agreement put forward for this Court’s final approval represents a positive result for the Class and the

general public.

13. Our firm has incurred out of pocket costs in the amount of $411,238.32 and billed fees

in the amount of $2,137,200.00, supported by detailed invoices and billing records for time spent

investigating, prosecuting and negotiating this matter. My firm’s lodestar is based on 4,244.7 hours of

work already expended (over 2,900 attorney hours and 1,339 paralegal and law clerk hours), with

additional time necessary to complete final approval, which has not yet been billed.

14. Class Counsel’s requested rates are as follows:

Name Position Hourly Rate Hours Billed

John H. Gomez Managing Partner $1,000.00 72.9

Deborah S. Dixon Senior Trial Attorney $600.00 1,714

Deborah S. Dixon Of Counsel $650.00 1,118.8

Kelly A. McDaniel Paralegal $250.00 498.4

Kelly A. McDaniel Senior Paralegal $275.00 460.6

Various (4 in total) Law Clerks $150.00 380

15. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is my firm’s updated resume, supporting the rates listed

above.

16. Devoting thousands of hours between October 2015 and September 2019 necessarily

precluded my firm, and particularly me, from taking on other matters. There was significant risk that

our firm, despite committing these resources, would not have received any compensation for its

services. Our ability to collect compensation was entirely contingent upon prevailing. Accordingly,

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


the substantial risk of non-recovery inherent to class action litigation cannot be minimized or

discounted in arriving at a fair fee for contingent fee cases. From the outset of this litigation to the

present, my firm litigated this matter on a contingent bases and placed its own resources at risk to do

so.

17. The time expended in connection with this litigation by Gomez Trial Attorneys, as set

forth herein, is reasonable in amount, particularly when compared to the complexity of this litigation

and the quality of the result achieved on behalf of the class.

18. I was the lead attorney at our firm responsible for handling the day-to-day litigation and

personally billed 2,832.8 hours ($1,756,035.00) on this matter, up through December 10, 2019. I have

not included any time I will invest following December 10, 2019, although I will incur significant time

relating to final approval, responding to any opposition filed or objectors, if any.

19. I personally prepared for depositions, handled research and writing of motions, prepared

for and argued several motions, including motions to strike experts, motion for summary judgment,

and several rounds of briefing on class certification. John Gomez and I prepared litigation strategy, as

well as trial strategy. I completed the pretrial disclosures and all the pretrial filings and final Trial

Readiness Conference filings, including selecting and designating exhibits, objections to Defendant’s

exhibits, deposition designations, met and conferred with counsel on trial issues and motions in limine,

drafted jury instructions and objections to Defendant’s jury instructions, statement of the case and

verdict forms. Not only was this case vigorously litigated with motions and discovery, but trial was no

different. I, along with John Gomez, worked through evidentiary issues, key trial themes, witness

order and preparation. I attended mediation and I continued to be the point person to communicate

with Apple’s counsel on settlement terms until an ultimate resolution was achieved. I was then the

main person communicating the negotiations relating to the settlement agreement and revisiting it

accordingly. In addition, I was primarily responsible for briefing preliminary approval and worked

extensively on the motion for attorneys’ fees and will invest considerable time briefing final approval.

20. I was a Senior Trial Attorney at Gomez Trial Attorneys and transitioned to an Of

Counsel position in November 2017. At the time I was a Senior Trial Attorney at Gomez Trial

Attorneys, it was the most senior attorney position, other than John Gomez’s position and is akin to

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


traditional partner role and title. I am familiar with reasonable rates in San Diego and within our state

and federal district for complex cases, such as this one. I believe, based on my experience, the

complexities of this case, the results achieved and the risk associated with contingency class actions,

that my rate of $600 from October 2015 through December 2017 is appropriate and my rate of $650

from January 2018 to the present is equally appropriate. My rate has been approved recently in 2017 in

two separate federal cases as appropriate (Judge Bashant’s Orders in cases 3:09-CV-02109-BAS-MDD

and 3:12-cv-00376-BAS-JAB), as well as on September 14, 2018 by Judge Wohlfeil (Case No. 37-

2014-00020192-CU-BT-CLT).

21. I am aware from recent rulings by Courts who approved rates for class counsel hourly

rates ranging from $275 to $1600 for partners; from $150 to $790 for associates; and from $80 to $490

for paralegals. Gomez Trial Attorneys hourly rates are well within the range that is standard and

custom in San Diego County.

22. The 2014 National Law Journal confirms Counsel’s rates are reasonable and consistent

with the rates charged by firms in Southern California. Attached hereto as Exhibit 3 is a true and

correct copy of the 2014 Report on the State of the Legal Market by Georgetown Law showing law

firms in Southern California bill between $975 and $310 per partner and $750 to $255 per an associate

in 2014. The average billable rate for attorneys in 2013 was $476.00. The 2014 National Law Journal

found rates increase by an average of 3.7% each year. This would be from 2014 to 2019 the rates

would increase 18.5% from the averages in 2014. Therefore, 2019 rates would then be partners:

$1,155.37 to $367.35 and associates: $888.75 to $302.17.

23. Mr. Gomez was the lead trial attorney for this case and while not responsible for day-to

day litigation, was involved in strategy and trial preparation. I have personally reviewed the time

billed by Mr. Gomez for his work on this case. Mr. Gomez recorded 72.9 hours on this matter, up

through September 2019. Mr. Gomez is well known in this Court for his exceptional work on complex

plaintiffs’ matters. He was primarily responsible for trial strategy and planning as he would have been

the lead trial attorney and I would have second-chaired with him. In that regard, he incurred

reasonable hours developing strategy in preparation for trial, including key expert issues, as well as

issues relating to trial versus bench trial presentation of evidence. Based on my experience in

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


California state and federal district, especially the Southern District, Mr. Gomez’s hourly rate of

$1,000 is reasonable and commensurate with trial attorneys of his vintage and experience.

24. Our paralegal, Kelly McDaniel, spent approximately 959 hours of billable time working

on this case. She invested significant other time that was deemed administrative and we are not

seeking recovery of such time. Ms. McDaniel’s billing rate of $275 per hour1, given her level of

experience and the tasks she completed in this case. Ms. McDaniel has nearly 12 years of experience

as a litigation paralegal. Ms. McDaniel previously worked as a settlement paralegal for Bernstein

Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP working excluding in class action matters. Based on my

experience and knowledge of paralegal rates in San Diego, her rate is reasonable and appropriate.

25. I have personally reviewed and have knowledge of the time Ms. McDaniel incurred in

this case working directly for me and at my direction and supervision.

26. We also assigned four different law clerks in four years to work on this case to keep the

fees reasonable rather than charging my rate. The law clerks billed at $150/hour and in total recorded

380 hours for work on page-line summaries, research, document review, assisting in gathering

documents and evidence in support of the motions for class certification and opposition to motions to

strike experts. These hours incurred were at the specific direction of me and my direct oversight. At

various times it was necessary to have associates research particular issues or assist with motions, but

we have not submitted that time to ensure there was no overlap in assignments. The associate rate is

higher than law clerk rates.

27. The work our office performed on this case was necessary to ensure the successful

prosecution of this litigation. I have time records itemizing the time spent by each attorney and

paralegal which can be presented to the Court at a hearing, if necessary.

28. From the outset, Class Counsel litigated this matter on a contingent basis and committed

their own resources to do so. Class Counsel expended 14,672.8 total hours attorney and staff hours and

$846,118.01 solely in costs, exclusive of class notice of $518,821, with no assurance of payment

whatsoever. The blended rate for Class Counsel is $477 ($7,000,000 divided by 14,672.8 total hours).

1 Ms. McDaniel’s hourly billing rate prior to 2018 was $250. She was promoted to Senior Paralegal starting January 2018, which increased her hourly billing rate to $275.

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


29. Class Counsel has incurred $846,118.01 in costs, exclusive of the KCC charge of

$518,821 for class notice, all of which were necessary to the conduct of this litigation. The vast

majority of the costs incurred by Gomez Trial Attorneys and Doyle Lowther are for Expert Witness

fess ($597,042.76), Hearing, Deposition Reporting, and Transcript Fees ($83,298.66), and Filing and

Service of Process fees ($10,360.92), which are all common costs associated with a complex class

litigation.

30. I have personally reviewed the cost invoices and itemization incurred by Gomez Trial

Attorneys. My firm incurred the following out-of-pocket expenses in this case:

Product/Service Total Amount

Deposition Transcripts $47,502.12

Deposition Videos $7,227.15

Deposition Travel $10,182.42

Expert Fees $280,636.88

Internal Copy Charges $1,428.502

External Copy Charges $5,368.16

Court-Ordered Discovery Referee $5,940.62

Mediation $4,660.00

Court Filing Fees $2,406.15

Service of Process $1,713.03

Appellate Counsel $44,173.29

TOTAL $411,238.32

31. The costs incurred were necessary for the litigation of this case and not excessive.

32. Gomez Trial Attorneys is not seeking reimbursement for meals, research, travel or

postage for service or filings or pre-trial focus groups or for internal parking charges for depositions

2 Class Counsel is not charging for $1,411.75 of internal copy costs and only charging for internal costs incurred for deposition exhibits, court or service copies.

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


and meetings. Gomez Trial Attorneys incurred thousands of dollars in costs that we are not seeking to

be reimbursed.

33. In total, the fees requested are still less than lodestar and do not include the estimated

90-150 hours necessary for final approval and any opposition to the motion for attorneys’ fees or

objectors, if any. If approved, Class Counsel’s fee award of $7,000,000 would compensate counsel for

most, but not all, their time, and not result in any multiplier.

The Settlement Fund Is More than Sufficient to Pay Claims, Class Administration,

Reimbursement of Costs and Class Counsel’s Lodestar

34. The total relief awarded to the class will ensure every class member could make a

claim. Apple has agreed to pay $20,000,000 to a Settlement Fund to pay all the class claims, Claims

Administration, attorneys’ fees and costs awarded by this Court.

35. Under the settlement’s terms, Class Members will receive a cash payment of up to

$24.00 for each eligible Class iPhone, with each Class Member being able to submit a claim for each

Class iPhone purchased.

36. For those Class Members who previously contacted Apple about the sleep/wake button

defect and did not receive a free repair or replacement from Apple, a Claim Form will not be required,

and instead Apple will automatically and directly pay all Class Members who previously contacted

Apple about the sleep/wake button defect on their Class iPhones.

37. For those Class Members who never contacted Apple directly about the sleep/wake

button defect, they will be required to complete a simple Proof of Claim form declaring under penalty

of perjury they had a Class iPhone that experienced the sleep/wake button defect within the applicable

warranty period, which will be identified on the form.

38. Based on expert testimony throughout the pendency of this case, Class Counsel

estimates the class size to be approximately 500,000 iPhones. If every single class member makes a

claim, the Settlement Fund is robust enough to pay every claim.

39. If the actual claims dramatically exceeds the number of claims estimated by the experts

and more than 500,000 valid claims are received, each class member’s claim may be reduced pro rata.

However, based on information provided by the experts, as well as Apple’s own calculations, and the

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


Claims Administrator’s experience with claims-rates in comparable litigations, Gomez Trial Attorneys

along with Doyle Lowther, as Class Counsel, do not believe any class member’s claim will be reduced.

40. Defendant Apple has agreed to pay incentive awards to each Class Representative

Plaintiffs of up to $10,000 each. Plaintiffs have acted been deposed, participated in discovery and

settlement discussions and many meetings and phone calls with Class Counsel.

41. Plaintiffs’ economist expert, Mr. Pinsonneault testified in deposition the Class damages,

based on a diminution in value, would range from $99.40 to $194.41 depending on the Class iPhone

and “launch” time compared to “date of sale.” On the other hand, Apple’s experts testified the Class

suffered zero damage for several reasons, including because of the existence of the warranty program

and “free repair” offered to the class members.

42. If Plaintiffs were able to successfully keep the class certified through trial, protect all of

their testifying experts from Defendant’s Sargon challenges, and then prevail at trial and obtain full

damages, the verdict could have been between $49,700,000 and $97,205,000.

43. Even assuming Plaintiffs would be successful at trial, Defendant would surely have

appealed to the Appellate Court, at least, if not beyond.

44. The fees will not reduce the class recovery or payments to the class. The Settlement

Fund is large enough to pay the requested lodestar fees and class claims, as well as costs and Claims

Administration. It is expected the Settlement Fund is so robust, there may be cy pres to be distributed.

45. To date, no member of the Class has objected to the Settlement. There are 4 requests for

exclusion.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is

true and correct. Executed this 13th day of December, 2019, in San Diego, California.

______________________________

Deborah S. Dixon, Esq.

EXHIBIT 1

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIACounty of SAN DIEGO Register of Actions Notice

Case Number: 37-2013-00055830-CU-PL-CTL Filing Date: 07/02/2013Case Title: Anthony Shamrell vs Apple Inc [E-File] Case Age: 2352 daysCase Status: Trial Set Location: CentralCase Category: Civil - Unlimited Judicial Officer: Ronald L. StynCase Type: Product Liability Department: C-74

Future EventsDate Time Department Event03/20/2020 02:00 PM C-74 Motion Hearing (Civil)

ParticipantsName Role RepresentationApple Inc Respondent,

DefendantPowers, Matthew D.

Muse, Jeffrey Plaintiff Hail, James RRysdyk, Daryl Plaintiff, Appellant Dixon, Deborah S; Gomez, John H; Hail, James

R; Mansfield, Alan MShamrell, Anthony Plaintiff, Appellant Dixon, Deborah S; Gomez, John H; Hail, James

R; Mansfield, Alan M

RepresentationName Address Phone NumberDIXON, DEBORAH S GOMEZ TRIAL ATTORNEYS 655 W Broadway

1700 San Diego CA 92101 3370(619) 237-3490

GOMEZ, JOHN H GOMEZ TRIAL ATTORNEYS 655 W Broadway1700 San Diego CA 92101

(619) 237-3490

HAIL, JAMES R DOYLE LOWTHER LLP 4400 NE 77th Ave 275Vancouver WA 98662

(360) 818-9320

MANSFIELD, ALAN M CONSUMER LAW GROUP 16870 W BernardoDrive 400 San Diego CA 92127

(619) 308-5034, (855)274-1888

POWERS, MATTHEW D O MELVENY & MYERS LLP Two EmbarcaderoCenter 28th Flr San Francisco CA 94111

(415) 984-8700

ROA# Entry Date Short/Long Entry Filed By1 07/02/2013 Complaint filed by Shamrell, Anthony.

Refers to: Apple IncShamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)

2 07/02/2013 Civil Case Cover Sheet filed by Shamrell, Anthony.Refers to: Apple Inc

Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)

3 07/02/2013 Original Summons filed by Shamrell, Anthony.Refers to: Apple Inc


4 07/02/2013 Statement of Venue filed by Shamrell, Anthony.Refers to: Apple Inc


5 07/02/2013 Summons issued.6 07/02/2013 Case assigned to Judicial Officer Styn, Ronald.7 07/02/2013 Civil Case Management Conference scheduled for

12/13/2013 at 10:00:00 AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L.Styn.

8 07/02/2013 Case initiation form printed.9 07/10/2013 Proof of Service of 30-day Summons & Complaint -

Personal filed by Shamrell, Anthony.Refers to: Apple Inc


10 07/23/2013 Certificate of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)11 08/13/2013 Notice of Jury Fee Deposit filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)

Date Printed: December 10, 2019 (3:03PM PST) Page 1 of 41

San Diego Superior Court Case: 37-2013-00055830-CU-PL-CTL Title: Anthony Shamrell vs Apple Inc [E-File]

12 08/19/2013 Demurrer / Motion to Strike scheduled for 11/08/2013 at08:30:00 AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.

13 08/19/2013 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 11/08/2013 at 08:30:00AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.

14 08/20/2013 Demurrer filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)15 08/20/2013 Request for Judicial Notice (in support of demurrer) filed by

Apple Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)

16 08/20/2013 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)17 08/21/2013 Motion - Other (Motion to Stay all Proceedings) filed by


18 08/21/2013 Declaration - Other (of Matthew D Powers) filed by AppleInc.

Apple Inc (Defendant)

19 08/21/2013 Proof of Service by Mail filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)20 10/21/2013 The Demurrer / Motion to Strike was rescheduled to

12/20/2013 at 08:30:00 AM in C-62 before Ronald L. Stynat Central.

21 10/21/2013 Demurrer / Motion to Strike scheduled for 12/20/2013 at08:30:00 AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.

22 10/21/2013 The Motion Hearing (Civil) was rescheduled to 12/20/2013at 08:30:00 AM in C-62 before Ronald L. Styn at Central.




26 10/25/2013 Proof of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)27 10/28/2013 The Motion Hearing (Civil) was rescheduled to 12/20/2013

at 08:30:00 AM in C-62 before Ronald L. Styn at Central.28 10/28/2013 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 12/20/2013 at 08:30:00

AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.29 10/28/2013 The Civil Case Management Conference was rescheduled

to 12/20/2013 at 08:30:00 AM in C-62 before Ronald L.Styn at Central.

30 10/28/2013 Civil Case Management Conference scheduled for12/20/2013 at 08:30:00 AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L.Styn.

31 10/25/2013 Amended Complaint filed by Shamrell, Anthony.Refers to: Apple Inc


32 11/12/2013 Returned Mail filed by The Superior Court of San Diego.33 11/25/2013 Motion - Other (to Stay All Proceedings) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)34 11/25/2013 Declaration - Other (of Matthew D Powers) filed by Apple

Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)

35 11/25/2013 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)36 11/25/2013 Demurrer filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)37 12/05/2013 Proof of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)38 12/05/2013 Case Management Statement filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)39 12/09/2013 Opposition - Other (to Demurrer) filed by Shamrell,

Anthony.Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)

40 12/09/2013 Opposition - Other (to Motion to Stay all Proceedings) filedby Shamrell, Anthony.


41 12/09/2013 Declaration - Other (of Katherine S DiDonato in Support ofOpposition to Motion to Stay all Proceedings) filed byShamrell, Anthony.


42 12/09/2013 Proof of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)43 12/11/2013 Notice of Errata (as to the Third Amended Complaint) filed

by Shamrell, Anthony.Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)



44 12/13/2013 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)45 12/13/2013 Reply to Opposition - Other (in Support to Motion to Stay All

Proceedings) filed by Apple Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)

46 12/16/2013 [Another document for ROA# 46]46 12/16/2013 E-filing transaction partially accepted.47 12/13/2013 Reply (in Support of Demurrer) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)48 12/13/2013 Request for Judicial Notice (in Support of Demurrer) filed by


49 12/13/2013 Order - Other submitted by Apple Inc received but not filedon 12/13/2013.


50 12/17/2013 [Another document for ROA# 50]50 12/17/2013 [Another document for ROA# 50]50 12/17/2013 [Another document for ROA# 50]50 12/17/2013 E-filing transaction partially accepted.51 12/16/2013 Declaration - Other (of Matthew D Powers in Support of

Reply to Motion to Stay All Proceedings) filed by Apple Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)

52 12/16/2013 Declaration - Other (of Scott B Murray in Support ofRequest for Judicial Notice) filed by Apple Inc.


53 12/18/2013 Opposition - Other (to Request for Judicial Notice) filed byShamrell, Anthony.


54 12/18/2013 Declaration - Other (of Chris W Cantrell in Support ofOpposition to Request for Judicial Notice) filed by Shamrell,Anthony.


55 12/18/2013 Proof of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)56 12/19/2013 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.59 12/20/2013 Civil Case Management Conference continued pursuant to

Court's motion to 03/07/2014 at 02:00PM before JudgeRonald L. Styn.

60 12/20/2013 Minutes finalized for Civil Case Management Conferenceheard 12/20/2013 08:30:00 AM.

61 12/20/2013 Notice of Rescheduled Hearing SD generated.64 12/20/2013 Demurrer / Motion to Strike continued pursuant to Court's

motion to 03/07/2014 at 02:00PM before Judge Ronald L.Styn.

65 12/20/2013 Minutes finalized for Demurrer / Motion to Strike heard12/20/2013 08:30:00 AM.

68 12/20/2013 Motion Hearing (Civil) continued pursuant to Court's motionto 03/07/2014 at 02:00PM before Judge Ronald L. Styn.

69 12/20/2013 Minutes finalized for Motion Hearing (Civil) heard12/20/2013 08:30:00 AM.

70 01/09/2014 Returned Mail (notice of cmc hearing 3/7/14) filed by TheSuperior Court of San Diego.Refers to: Apple Inc

71 02/14/2014 Discovery Hearing scheduled for 03/07/2014 at 02:00:00PM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.

72 02/20/2014 Case Management Statement filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)73 02/20/2014 Proof of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)74 03/03/2014 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 03/07/2014 at 02:00:00

PM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn was vacated.75 03/05/2014 Statement - Other (Joint Statement regarding Protective

Order) filed by Apple Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)

76 03/05/2014 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)77 03/06/2014 Tentative Ruling for Demurrer / Motion to Strike published.78 03/07/2014 Minutes finalized for Civil Case Management Conference

heard 03/07/2014 02:00:00 PM.



79 03/07/2014 Minutes finalized for Discovery Hearing heard 03/07/201402:00:00 PM.

80 03/07/2014 Minutes finalized for Demurrer / Motion to Strike heard03/07/2014 02:00:00 PM.

81 03/07/2014 Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (REGINA L.GARRISON - GRANTED) filed by The Superior Court ofSan Diego.



84 04/07/2014 Motion - Other filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)85 04/07/2014 Proof of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)86 04/08/2014 [Another document for ROA# 86]86 04/08/2014 [Another document for ROA# 86]86 04/08/2014 E-filing transaction partially accepted.87 04/11/2014 Ex Parte scheduled for 04/22/2014 at 08:30:00 AM at

Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.88 04/18/2014 Demurrer / Motion to Strike scheduled for 07/11/2014 at

08:30:00 AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.89 04/21/2014 Ex Parte scheduled for 04/22/2014 at 08:30:00 AM at

Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn was vacated.90 04/22/2014 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 07/11/2014 at 08:30:00

AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.91 04/21/2014 Stipulation - Other - Fee Due (Stipulation and Order Setting

Deadlines for Demurrer and Motion to seal Portions ofSecond Amended Complaint) filed by Apple Inc; Shamrell,Anthony.

Apple Inc (Defendant); Shamrell,Anthony (Plaintiff)

92 04/21/2014 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)93 04/30/2014 Discovery Hearing scheduled for 06/20/2014 at 08:30:00

AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.94 05/12/2014 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 06/20/2014 at 08:30:00

AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.95 05/08/2014 Declaration - Other (of Scott B Murray in Support of Apple

Inc's Motion to Seal Confidential Portions of SecondAmended Complaint) filed by Apple Inc.


96 05/08/2014 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)97 05/29/2014 Notice of Lodgment (Re: Motion to Compel Production of

Documents and Further Responses to Interrogatories) filedby Shamrell, Anthony.


98 05/29/2014 Proof of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)99 05/29/2014 Notice of Lodgment (Re: Motioin for Leave to Amend) filed

by Shamrell, Anthony.Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)

100 05/29/2014 Motion for Leave to Amend (and Notice of Motion for Leaveto Amend; Memorandum of Points & Authorities;Declaration; Notice of Lodgment; Proof of ElectronicService; Proof of Service) filed by Shamrell, Anthony.


101 06/06/2014 Notice of Lodgment (Regarding Plaintiffs' Opposition toApple Inc's Demurrer to Second Amended Complaint) filedby Shamrell, Anthony.


102 06/06/2014 Proof of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)104 06/09/2014 The Motion Hearing (Civil) was rescheduled to 07/11/2014


AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.



106 06/09/2014 The Discovery Hearing was rescheduled to 07/11/2014 at08:30:00 AM in C-62 before Ronald L. Styn at Central.

107 06/09/2014 Discovery Hearing scheduled for 07/11/2014 at 08:30:00AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.

108 06/10/2014 Motion to Compel Discovery filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)109 06/10/2014 Proof of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)110 06/10/2014 Motion for Leave to Amend filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)111 06/10/2014 Proof of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)112 06/10/2014 Opposition - Other (to Apple Inc.'s Demurrer to Second

Amended Class Action Complaint) filed by Shamrell,Anthony.


113 06/10/2014 Proof of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)114 06/10/2014 Declaration - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)115 06/10/2014 Motion - Other (to Seal Confidential Portions of Demurrer)

filed by Apple Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)

116 06/10/2014 Motion to Strike filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)117 06/10/2014 Order - Other ([Proposed] Order Re: Granting Motion to

Strike) submitted by Apple Inc received but not filed on06/10/2014.


118 06/10/2014 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)119 06/10/2014 Notice of Lodgment (Regarding Motion to Seal Confidential

Portions of Second Amended Complaint) filed by Apple Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)

120 06/10/2014 Motion - Other (Motion to Seal Confidential Portions ofSecond Amended Class Action Complaint) filed by AppleInc.


121 06/10/2014 Declaration - Other (of Scott B Murray) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)122 06/10/2014 Order - Other ([Proposed] Order Re Motion to Seal

Confidential Portins of Plaintiffs Second Amended ClassAction Complaint) submitted by Apple Inc received but notfiled on 06/10/2014.


123 06/10/2014 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)124 06/10/2014 Demurrer filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)125 06/10/2014 Notice of Lodgment (Regarding Demurrer to Second

Amended Class Action Complaint) filed by Apple Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)

126 06/10/2014 Declaration - Other (of Devin P Alavian in Support ofDemurrer to Second Amended Class Action Complaint)filed by Apple Inc.


127 06/10/2014 Request for Judicial Notice (in support of Demurrer) filed byApple Inc.


128 06/10/2014 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)129 06/16/2014 Motion - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)130 06/16/2014 Notice of Lodgment (Regarding Opposition to Motion to

Compel) filed by Apple Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)

131 06/16/2014 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)132 06/16/2014 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)133 06/17/2014 [Another document for ROA# 133]133 06/17/2014 [Another document for ROA# 133]133 06/17/2014 [Another document for ROA# 133]133 06/17/2014 E-filing transaction partially accepted.134 06/16/2014 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)135 06/16/2014 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)136 06/16/2014 Notice of Lodgment (RE Opposition to Motion for Leave to

Amend) filed by Apple Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)

137 06/17/2014 [Another document for ROA# 137]137 06/17/2014 [Another document for ROA# 137]



137 06/17/2014 [Another document for ROA# 137]137 06/17/2014 E-filing transaction partially accepted.138 06/16/2014 Opposition - Other (to Motion to Strike) filed by Shamrell,

Anthony.Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)

139 06/16/2014 Declaration - Other (of Chris W Cantrell) filed by Shamrell,Anthony.


140 06/16/2014 Proof of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)141 06/04/2014 Stipulation - Other (and order setting deadlines for Plaintiffs'

opposition and Aplle Inc's reply in support of Demurrer andMotion to strike portions of Plaintiffs' 2nd amendedcomplaint) filed by Apple Inc.


142 06/17/2014 Declaration - Other (Compendium of Non-CaliforniaAuthorities in Support of Opposition to Motion to Compeland Opposition to Motion for Leave to Amend) filed byApple Inc.


143 06/17/2014 Opposition - Other (to Motion to Compel) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)144 06/17/2014 Declaration - Other (of Matthew D Powers) filed by Apple


145 06/17/2014 Declaration - Other (of Allan Coulson) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)146 06/17/2014 Statement - Other (Separate Statement in Oppositon to

Motion to Compel Set 1) filed by Apple Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)

147 06/17/2014 Statement - Other (Seaprate Statement in Opposition toMotion to Compel set 2) filed by Apple Inc.


148 06/17/2014 Opposition - Other (to Motion for Leave to Amend) filed byApple Inc.


149 06/17/2014 Declaration - Other (of Allan Coulson) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)150 06/17/2014 Declaration - Other (of Matthew D Powers) filed by Apple


151 07/01/2014 Reply to Opposition of Noticed Motion and SupportingDeclarations filed by Apple Inc.


152 07/01/2014 Motion - Other (to Seal Confidential Portions of Opposition)filed by Apple Inc.


153 07/01/2014 Reply (in support of Demurrer) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)154 07/01/2014 Notice of Lodgment (Regarding Reply in Support of

Demurrer) filed by Apple Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)

155 07/01/2014 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)156 07/01/2014 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)157 07/01/2014 Reply to Opposition of Noticed Motion and Supporting

Declarations filed by Apple Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)

158 07/01/2014 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)159 07/02/2014 Proof of Service (on Reply in Support of Motion for Leave to

Amend) filed by Shamrell, Anthony.Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)

160 07/02/2014 Objections (Evidentiary Objections to the Declaration ofAllan Coulson in Support of Apple Inc's Oppositions toPlaintiff's Motion for Leave to Amend and Motion toCompel) filed by Shamrell, Anthony.


161 07/02/2014 Reply (Reply in Support of Motion for Leave to Amend) filedby Shamrell, Anthony.


162 07/02/2014 Reply (Reply in support of Motion to Compel Production ofDocuments and Further Responses to Interrogatories) filedby Shamrell, Anthony.


163 07/02/2014 Stipulation - Other - Fee Due (Stipulation and Order settingBriefing Deadlines for Motion to Compel and Motion forLeave; Motion to Seal Material Submitted in Support ofMotion to Compel and Moiton for leave to AmendOppositions thereto and Replies thereto) filed by Apple Inc.




164 06/18/2014 Stipulation - Other - Fee Due (Stipulation and Order SettingBriefing Deadlines and Hearing Schedule for Apple IncsMotion to Seal) filed by Apple Inc; Shamrell, Anthony.


165 07/07/2014 Notice of Lodgment (Regarding Replies in Support ofMotion to Compel and Motion for Leave to AmendComplaint) filed by Shamrell, Anthony.


166 07/08/2014 Motion - Other (Motion to Seal Confidential Portions ofDocuments) filed by Apple Inc.


167 07/08/2014 Declaration - Other (of Scott B Murray) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)168 07/08/2014 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)169 07/09/2014 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 09/26/2014 at 08:30:00

AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.170 07/09/2014 Opposition - Other (to Apple Inc's Motion to Seal) filed by

Shamrell, Anthony.Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)

171 07/09/2014 Notice of Lodgment (Regarding Objections and Oppositionto Motion to Seal) filed by Shamrell, Anthony.


172 07/09/2014 Proof of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)173 07/09/2014 Objections (to the Declaration of Allan Coulson in Support

of Oppositions to Motion for Leave to Amend and Motion toCompel) filed by Apple Inc.


174 07/09/2014 Notice of Lodgment (Regarding Responses to EvidentiaryObjections) filed by Apple Inc.


175 07/09/2014 Declaration - Other (of Matthew D Powers) filed by AppleInc.


176 07/09/2014 Declaration - Other (of Allan Coulson) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)177 07/09/2014 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)178 07/09/2014 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)179 07/09/2014 Motion - Other (to Seal Confidential Portions of Responses)


180 07/09/2014 Declaration - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)181 07/09/2014 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)182 07/10/2014 Objections filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)183 07/10/2014 Proof of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)184 07/10/2014 Tentative Ruling for Discovery Hearing published.185 07/10/2014 Tentative Ruling for Demurrer / Motion to Strike published.186 07/10/2014 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.187 07/10/2014 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.188 07/11/2014 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.189 07/11/2014 Tentative Ruling for Discovery Hearing published.190 07/11/2014 Tentative Ruling for Demurrer / Motion to Strike published.191 07/11/2014 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.192 07/11/2014 Minutes finalized for Motion Hearing (Civil) heard

07/11/2014 08:30:00 AM.195 07/11/2014 Demurrer / Motion to Strike continued pursuant to Court's

motion to 10/10/2014 at 08:30AM before Judge Ronald L.Styn.

196 07/11/2014 Minutes finalized for Demurrer / Motion to Strike heard07/11/2014 08:30:00 AM.

197 07/14/2014 Demurrer / Motion to Strike scheduled for 10/10/2014 at08:30:00 AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn wasvacated.

198 07/11/2014 Minutes finalized for Discovery Hearing heard 07/11/201408:30:00 AM.

199 07/11/2014 Minutes finalized for Motion Hearing (Civil) heard07/11/2014 08:30:00 AM.



200 07/11/2014 Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (Ruth EllenShoaff - GRANTED -) filed by The Superior Court of SanDiego.

201 07/07/2014 Declaration - Other (Supplemental Declaration fo Chris WCantrell in supoprt of Motion to Compel and Motion forLeave to Amend) filed by Shamrell, Anthony.




204 09/19/2014 Discovery Hearing scheduled for 09/26/2014 at 08:30:00AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn was vacated.

205 09/19/2014 Discovery Hearing scheduled for 09/26/2014 at 08:30:00AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn was vacated.

206 09/25/2014 Reply filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)207 09/25/2014 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.208 09/26/2014 Minutes finalized for Motion Hearing (Civil) heard

09/26/2014 08:30:00 AM.209 10/08/2014 Stipulation - Other - Fee Due (Stipulation and Order

Extending Deadline to File the Third Amended Class ActionComplaint) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Apple Inc.

Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);Apple Inc (Defendant)

210 10/08/2014 Proof of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)211 10/29/2014 Amended Complaint (Third) filed by Shamrell, Anthony;

Rysdyk, Daryl; Muse, Jeffrey.Refers to: Apple Inc

Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);Rysdyk, Daryl (Plaintiff); Muse,Jeffrey (Plaintiff)

212 10/29/2014 Notice - Other (of Lodgment Regarding Plaintiffs ThirdAmended Complaint) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,Daryl; Muse, Jeffrey.


213 10/29/2014 Proof of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl;Muse, Jeffrey.



215 11/12/2014 Motion - Other (to Seal Confidential Portions of ThirdAmended Class Action Complaint) filed by Apple Inc.


216 11/12/2014 Declaration - Other (of Scott B Murray) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)217 11/12/2014 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)218 12/01/2014 Demurrer / Motion to Strike scheduled for 02/13/2015 at

08:30:00 AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.219 12/02/2014 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 01/16/2015 at 08:30:00


AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.221 12/03/2014 Motion to Strike filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)222 12/03/2014 Declaration - Other (of Kelsey M Larson) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)223 12/03/2014 Order - Other submitted by Apple Inc received but not filed

on 12/03/2014.Apple Inc (Defendant)

224 12/03/2014 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)225 12/10/2014 The Motion Hearing (Civil) was rescheduled to 02/27/2015


AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.227 12/16/2014 Civil Case Management Conference scheduled for

01/16/2015 at 08:30:00 AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L.Styn.

228 01/05/2015 Response (to Motion to Seal) filed by Shamrell, Anthony;Rysdyk, Daryl; Muse, Jeffrey.






230 01/09/2015 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 01/16/2015 at 08:30:00AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn was vacated.



232 01/09/2015 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)233 01/15/2015 Case Management Statement filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)234 01/15/2015 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)235 01/15/2015 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.236 01/15/2015 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.237 01/16/2015 Minutes finalized for Motion Hearing (Civil) heard

01/16/2015 08:30:00 AM.239 01/16/2015 Motion Hearing to Certify/Decertify Class Action scheduled

for 06/05/2015 at 08:30AM before Judge Ronald L. Styn.240 01/16/2015 Minutes finalized for Multiple Events heard 01/16/2015

08:30:00 AM.241 01/16/2015 Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (Ruth Ellen

Shoaff - Granted) filed by The Superior Court of San Diego.242 01/05/2015 Stipulation - Other - Fee Due (and Order Setting Deadlines

for Plaintiffs' Motion to Strike Portions of Third AmendedComplaint) filed by Apple Inc; Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,Daryl; Muse, Jeffrey.

Apple Inc (Defendant); Shamrell,Anthony (Plaintiff); Rysdyk, Daryl(Plaintiff); Muse, Jeffrey(Plaintiff)

243 01/05/2015 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)244 01/20/2015 Stipulation - Other (STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER)

filed by Apple Inc; Muse, Jeffrey; Rysdyk, Daryl; Shamrell,Anthony.

Apple Inc (Defendant); Muse,Jeffrey (Plaintiff); Rysdyk, Daryl(Plaintiff); Shamrell, Anthony(Plaintiff)

245 01/20/2015 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)246 01/28/2015 Amended Complaint (Fourth) filed by Shamrell, Anthony;





248 02/03/2015 Miscellaneous Minute Order Finalized.249 02/03/2015 Clerk's Certificate of Service By Mail (Minutes Only) SD

generated.250 01/29/2015 Stipulation - Other - Fee Due (to Remove Plaintiff's Fourth

Amended Complaint from Court File and Lodge Under Seal)filed by Apple Inc; Shamrell, Anthony.


251 01/29/2015 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)252 02/04/2015 Motion to Strike (PORTIONS OF PLAINTIFFS' FOURTH

AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT) filed by AppleInc.


253 02/04/2015 Declaration - Other (OF KELSEY M LARSON) filed byApple Inc.


254 02/04/2015 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)255 02/06/2015 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 04/17/2015 at 08:30:00

AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.256 02/06/2015 Amended Complaint (Fourth) filed by Shamrell, Anthony;







258 02/09/2015 Motion - Other (to Seal Confidential Portions of FourthAmended Class Action Complaint) filed by Apple Inc.


259 02/09/2015 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)260 02/09/2015 Declaration - Other (of Scott B Murray) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)261 02/17/2015 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)

scheduled for 06/05/2015 at 08:30:00 AM at Central in C-62Ronald L. Styn.

262 02/13/2015 Opposition - Other (to Motion to Strike) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl; Muse, Jeffrey.


263 02/13/2015 Declaration - Other (of Chris W Cantrell) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl; Muse, Jeffrey.






266 02/20/2015 Declaration - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)267 02/20/2015 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)268 02/26/2015 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.269 02/27/2015 Minutes finalized for Motion Hearing (Civil) heard

02/27/2015 08:30:00 AM.270 02/27/2015 Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (Amorita

Ledsma, CSR #12852, Granted) filed by The Superior Courtof San Diego.

271 03/09/2015 Answer filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)272 03/09/2015 Request for Dismissal without Prejudice - Party filed by

Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.Refers to: Muse, Jeffrey

Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);Rysdyk, Daryl (Plaintiff)

273 03/09/2015 Proof of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);Rysdyk, Daryl (Plaintiff)


275 03/18/2015 The Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)was rescheduled to 09/11/2015 at 08:30:00 AM in C-62before Ronald L. Styn at Central.

276 03/18/2015 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)scheduled for 09/11/2015 at 08:30:00 AM at Central in C-62Ronald L. Styn.

277 03/19/2015 Notice - Other (Notice of Hearing on Motion and Demurrerto Answer Filed by Apple Inc) filed by Shamrell, Anthony;Rysdyk, Daryl; Muse, Jeffrey.


278 03/19/2015 Memorandum of Points and Authorities filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl; Muse, Jeffrey.




280 03/23/2015 The Motion Hearing to Certify/Decertify Class Action wasrescheduled to 09/11/2015 at 08:30:00 AM in C-62 beforeRonald L. Styn at Central.

281 03/23/2015 Motion Hearing to Certify/Decertify Class Action scheduledfor 09/11/2015 at 08:30:00 AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L.Styn.

282 03/18/2015 Stipulation - Other - Fee Due (Stipulationa nd OrderContinuing Dates on Motion to Certify Class and SettingDeadlines for Apple Inc's Opposition and Plaintiff's Reply)filed by Apple Inc; Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl; Muse,Jeffrey.

Apple Inc (Defendant); Shamrell,Anthony (Plaintiff); Rysdyk, Daryl(Plaintiff); Muse, Jeffrey(Plaintiff)





285 04/27/2015 Amended Complaint dismissed without prejudice as toMuse, Jeffrey .

286 04/07/2015 Request for Dismissal without Prejudice - Party filed byShamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.Refers to: Muse, Jeffrey


287 04/07/2015 Declaration - Other (of Chris W Cantrell) filed by Muse,Jeffrey; Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.

Muse, Jeffrey (Plaintiff);Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);Rysdyk, Daryl (Plaintiff)

288 04/27/2015 Order - Other (Granting Request for Dismissal of Claims ofJeffrey Muse) filed by Muse, Jeffrey; Shamrell, Anthony;Rysdyk, Daryl.


289 04/07/2015 Proof of Service filed by Muse, Jeffrey; Shamrell, Anthony;Rysdyk, Daryl.


290 05/15/2015 Opposition - Other (to Motion to Seal) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl; Muse, Jeffrey.




292 05/15/2015 Notice - Other (RE Opposition to Motion to Seal) filed byShamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl; Muse, Jeffrey.




294 05/15/2015 Amended Answer filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)295 05/15/2015 Response (to Plaintiffs' Demurrer to Defendant Apple Inc's

Answer to Fourth Amended Complaint) filed by Apple Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)



297 05/22/2015 Notice of Lodgment filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)298 05/22/2015 Declaration - Other (of Matthew D Powers in Support of

Apple Inc's Reply to Motion to Seal Confidential Portions ofPlaintiffs Fourth Amended Class Action Complaint) filed byApple Inc.


299 05/22/2015 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)300 05/22/2015 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)301 05/28/2015 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 09/11/2015 at 08:30:00

AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.302 05/28/2015 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.303 05/28/2015 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.304 05/29/2015 Minutes finalized for Motion Hearing (Civil) heard

05/29/2015 08:30:00 AM.305 05/29/2015 Minutes finalized for Motion Hearing (Civil) heard

05/29/2015 08:30:00 AM.306 05/15/2015 Opposition - Other (Plaintiffs Opposition to Defendant Apple

Inc.'s Motion to Seal (Unredacted / Sealed)) filed byShamrell, Anthony.


307 05/29/2015 Notice of Sealed Document (Per Court's 05/29/15 MinuteOrder) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Apple Inc.

Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);Apple Inc (Defendant)

308 05/15/2015 Declaration - Other (Declaration of Chris W. Cantrell InSupport of Plaintiffs Opposition to Apple's Motion to Seal(Unredacted / Sealed)) filed by Shamrell, Anthony.




309 05/22/2015 Reply to Opposition - Other (Apple's Reply in Support ofMotion to Seal Confidential Portions of Plaintiffs' FourthAmended Class Action Complaint (Unredated / Sealed))filed by Apple Inc.


310 05/22/2015 Declaration - Other (Declaration of Matthew D. Powers InSupport of Apple Inc.'s Reply to Motion to Seal ConfidentialPortions of Pltfs Fourth Amended Class Action Complaint(Unredacted / Sealed)) filed by Apple Inc.


311 05/28/2015 Motion - Other (to Seal Re Opposition to and Reply) filed byApple Inc.


312 06/01/2015 Stipulation - Other - Fee Due (and Order Appointing HonRobert E May as Special Discovery Referee) filed by AppleInc; Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.

Apple Inc (Defendant); Shamrell,Anthony (Plaintiff); Rysdyk, Daryl(Plaintiff)

313 06/17/2015 Order - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)314 06/01/2015 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)315 06/26/2015 Motion for Summary Judgment and/or Adjudication filed by


316 06/26/2015 Notice of Lodgment filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)317 06/26/2015 Declaration - Other (of Shanhari Sivagnanasundaram in

Support of Apple Inc's Moiton for Summary Judgment) filedby Apple Inc.


318 06/26/2015 Declaration - Other (of William Shearin in Support of AppleInc's Moiton for Summary Judgment) filed by Apple Inc.


319 06/26/2015 Declaration - Other (of Devin P Alavian in Support of AppleInc's Moiton for Summary Judgment) filed by Apple Inc.


320 06/26/2015 Statement of Undisputed Facts filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)321 06/26/2015 Declaration - Other (Appendix of Non-California Authorities

in Support of Apple Inc's Moiton for Summary Judgment)filed by Apple Inc.




323 06/26/2015 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)324 06/26/2015 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)325 06/26/2015 Motion - Other (to Seal Confidential Portions of Motion for

Summary Judgment) filed by Apple Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)

326 06/26/2015 Declaration - Other (of Scott B Murray in Support of AppleInc's Motion to Seal) filed by Apple Inc.




328 06/26/2015 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)329 07/17/2015 Motion - Other (Motion for Class Certification) filed by

Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl; Muse, Jeffrey.Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);Rysdyk, Daryl (Plaintiff); Muse,Jeffrey (Plaintiff)

330 07/17/2015 Memorandum of Points and Authorities (in support ofMotioni for Class Certification) filed by Shamrell, Anthony;Rysdyk, Daryl; Muse, Jeffrey.




332 07/17/2015 Notice of Lodgment (Regarding Motion for ClassCertification) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl;Muse, Jeffrey.




334 07/28/2015 Ex Parte scheduled for 08/05/2015 at 08:30:00 AM atCentral in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.

335 07/30/2015 The Ex Parte was rescheduled to 08/06/2015 at 08:30:00AM in C-62 before Ronald L. Styn at Central.




337 07/29/2015 Motion - Other (Notice of Motion and Motion to SealConfidential Portions of plaintiff's Class Certification Motion;Memorandum of P & A) filed by Apple Inc.


338 07/29/2015 Declaration - Other (of SCOTT B MURRAY) filed by AppleInc.


339 07/29/2015 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)340 08/05/2015 Ex Parte Application - Other and Supporting Documents (for

Leave to Amend Complaint and Class Certification Motionand Continue Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment)filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


341 08/05/2015 Memorandum of Points and Authorities filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.





344 08/05/2015 Notice of Lodgment filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,Daryl.


352 08/06/2015 Motion Hearing to Certify/Decertify Class Action continuedpursuant to Court's motion to 12/18/2015 at 02:00PM beforeJudge Ronald L. Styn.

353 08/06/2015 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)continued pursuant to Court's motion to 12/18/2015 at02:00PM before Judge Ronald L. Styn.


355 08/06/2015 Civil Case Management Conference scheduled for10/30/2015 at 11:00AM before Judge Ronald L. Styn.

356 08/06/2015 Minutes finalized for Ex Parte heard 08/06/2015 08:30:00AM.

357 08/06/2015 Notice of Hearing SD generated.358 08/06/2015 Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (Lois Mason

Thompson - Granted) filed by The Superior Court of SanDiego.

359 08/06/2015 Response (and Opposition to Ex Parte Applications) filed byApple Inc.


360 08/06/2015 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)361 10/15/2015 Association of Attorney filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,

Daryl.Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);Rysdyk, Daryl (Plaintiff)


363 10/27/2015 Association of Attorney filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,Daryl.

364 10/27/2015 Proof of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.365 11/03/2015 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 02/05/2016 at 08:30:00

AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.374 10/30/2015 Civil Case Management Conference continued pursuant to

Court's motion to 12/04/2015 at 11:00AM before JudgeRonald L. Styn.

375 10/30/2015 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)continued pursuant to Court's motion to 01/29/2016 at02:00PM before Judge Ronald L. Styn.






379 10/30/2015 Notice of Rescheduled Hearing SD generated.380 10/30/2015 Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (Christina

Lother - Granted) filed by The Superior Court of San Diego.381 11/10/2015 Notice of Change of Address / Telephone Number filed by

Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);Rysdyk, Daryl (Plaintiff)


383 11/05/2015 Notice of Appeal filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.Refers to: Apple Inc

Shamrell, Anthony (Appellant);Rysdyk, Daryl (Appellant)

384 11/05/2015 Declaration - Other filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,Daryl.




386 11/05/2015 Order - Other submitted by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,Daryl received but not filed on 11/05/2015.



388 11/20/2015 Opposition - Other (Opposition to Appeal) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)389 11/20/2015 Notice of Lodgment filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)390 11/20/2015 Declaration - Other (Declaration of Matthew D Powers) filed

by Apple Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)

391 11/20/2015 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)392 11/20/2015 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)393 11/24/2015 Notice of Change of Address / Telephone Number filed by

Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl; Muse, Jeffrey.394 12/01/2015 Reply filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl. Shamrell, Anthony (Appellant);

Rysdyk, Daryl (Appellant)395 12/01/2015 Declaration - Other filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,

Daryl.Shamrell, Anthony (Appellant);Rysdyk, Daryl (Appellant)

396 12/01/2015 Proof of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl. Shamrell, Anthony (Appellant);Rysdyk, Daryl (Appellant)

402 12/04/2015 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 01/29/2016 at 02:00PMbefore Judge Ronald L. Styn.

403 12/04/2015 Motion Hearing (Civil) continued pursuant to Court's motionto 12/24/2015 at 09:00AM before Judge Ronald L. Styn.



406 12/04/2015 Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (AmoritaLedesma - CSR #12852 - Granted) filed by The SuperiorCourt of San Diego.

407 12/23/2015 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.408 12/23/2015 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.409 12/24/2015 Minutes finalized for Motion Hearing (Civil) heard

12/24/2015 09:00:00 AM.410 12/24/2015 Recommendation and Order of Discovery Referee (Re: Plts

Mtn to Compel Compliance with Court Order and 2. DfdtsMtn for Protective Order (signed)) filed by May, Robert E.

May, Robert E (DiscoveryReferee)

411 12/30/2015 Clerk's Certificate of Service By Mail SD generated.



412 12/24/2015 Judgment was entered as follows: Judgment entered forApple Inc and against Rysdyk, Daryl ;Shamrell, Anthonyfor$ 0.00, punitive damages:$ 0.00, attorney fees:$ 0.00, interest:$ 0.00, prejudgment costs:$ 0.00, other costs:$ 0.00, amount payable to court:$ .00, for a grand total of$ 0.00.

414 12/30/2015 Clerk's Certificate of Service By Mail SD generated.415 12/28/2015 Motion for Reconsideration (of the Court's Order Regarding

Defendant's Motion to Strike) filed by Shamrell, Anthony;Rysdyk, Daryl.


416 12/28/2015 Memorandum of Points and Authorities (in Support ofMotion for Reconsideration of the Courts Order RegardingDefendants Motion to Strike) filed by Shamrell, Anthony;Rysdyk, Daryl.


417 12/28/2015 Declaration - Other (of Deborah S Dixon in Support ofMotion for Reconsideration of the Courts Order RegardingDefendants Motion to Strike) filed by Shamrell, Anthony;Rysdyk, Daryl.



419 01/19/2016 Opposition to Noticed Motion and Supporting Declarationsfiled by Apple Inc.


420 01/19/2016 Declaration - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)421 01/19/2016 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)422 01/19/2016 Opposition to Noticed Motion and Supporting Declarations


423 01/20/2016 Returned Mail (Court's 12/24/15 Minute Order etc mailed toAtty James Hail at the 10200 Willow Creek Address(RETURN TO SENDER/ Not Deliverable as addressed))filed by The Superior Court of San Diego.




426 01/22/2016 Reply filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)427 01/22/2016 Opposition - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)428 01/22/2016 Response filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)429 01/22/2016 Objections filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)430 01/22/2016 Declaration - Other (of Matthew D. Powers) filed by Apple


431 01/22/2016 Objections filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)432 01/22/2016 Brief - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)433 01/22/2016 Notice of Lodgment filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)434 01/22/2016 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)435 01/22/2016 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)436 01/25/2016 Reply to Opposition - Other filed by Shamrell, Anthony;

Rysdyk, Daryl.Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);Rysdyk, Daryl (Plaintiff)




439 01/22/2016 Motion - Other (NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TOSEAL CONFIDENTIAL PORTIONS OF REPLY TO MSJAND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS) filed by Apple Inc.




440 01/22/2016 Declaration - Other (OF SCOTT B MURRAY IN SUPPORTOF APPLE INCS MOTION TO SEAL) filed by Apple Inc.


441 01/22/2016 Order - Other ([PROPOSED] ORDER RE MOTION TOSEAL) submitted by Apple Inc received but not filed on01/22/2016.


442 01/22/2016 Proof of Service (of Motion to Seal and SupportingDocuments) filed by Apple Inc.


443 01/27/2016 Objections filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);Rysdyk, Daryl (Plaintiff)


445 01/15/2016 Notice of Lodgment filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)446 01/15/2016 Memorandum of Points and Authorities filed by Shamrell,

Anthony.Shamrell, Anthony (Appellant)

447 01/15/2016 Proof of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony. Shamrell, Anthony (Appellant)448 01/28/2016 Objections filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)449 01/28/2016 Order - Other submitted by Apple Inc received but not filed


450 01/28/2016 Notice of Lodgment filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)451 01/28/2016 Response filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)452 01/28/2016 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)453 01/28/2016 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)454 01/28/2016 Motion - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)455 01/28/2016 Declaration - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)456 01/28/2016 Order - Other submitted by Apple Inc received but not filed


457 01/28/2016 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)458 01/28/2016 Declaration - Other filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,


459 01/28/2016 Statement of Undisputed Facts filed by Shamrell, Anthony;Rysdyk, Daryl.


460 01/28/2016 Statement of Undisputed Facts filed by Shamrell, Anthony;Rysdyk, Daryl.




463 01/28/2016 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.464 01/28/2016 Tentative Ruling for Summary Judgment / Summary

Adjudication (Civil) published.465 01/28/2016 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.468 01/29/2016 Motion Hearing (Civil) continued pursuant to Court's motion

to 02/05/2016 at 11:00AM before Judge Ronald L. Styn.469 01/29/2016 Minutes finalized for Motion Hearing (Civil) heard

01/29/2016 02:00:00 PM.472 01/29/2016 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)

continued pursuant to Court's motion to 02/05/2016 at11:00AM before Judge Ronald L. Styn.

473 01/29/2016 Minutes finalized for Summary Judgment / SummaryAdjudication (Civil) heard 01/29/2016 02:00:00 PM.

476 01/29/2016 Motion Hearing (Civil) continued pursuant to Court's motionto 02/05/2016 at 11:00AM before Judge Ronald L. Styn.

477 01/29/2016 Minutes finalized for Motion Hearing (Civil) heard01/29/2016 02:00:00 PM.

478 02/02/2016 Notice of Change of Address / Telephone Number filed byShamrell, Anthony.



479 02/04/2016 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.480 02/04/2016 Tentative Ruling for Summary Judgment / Summary

Adjudication (Civil) published.481 02/04/2016 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.482 02/05/2016 Minutes finalized for Motion Hearing (Civil) heard

02/05/2016 11:00:00 AM.483 02/05/2016 Minutes finalized for Motion Hearing (Civil) heard

02/05/2016 11:00:00 AM.484 02/05/2016 Matter taken under submission.485 02/05/2016 Minutes finalized for Summary Judgment / Summary

Adjudication (Civil) heard 02/05/2016 11:00:00 AM.486 02/05/2016 Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (Kasey

Mobley, CSR #13407, Granted) filed by The Superior Courtof San Diego.

487 02/23/2016 Motion - Other (Notice of Motion and Motion to Seal) filedby Apple Inc.


488 02/23/2016 Declaration - Other (Declaration of Scott B. Murray inSupport of Motion to Seal) filed by Apple Inc.


489 02/23/2016 Order - Other (Proposed Order) submitted by Apple Increceived but not filed on 02/23/2016.


490 02/23/2016 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)491 03/10/2016 The Motion Hearing to Certify/Decertify Class Action was

rescheduled to 05/27/2016 at 02:00:00 PM in C-62 beforeRonald L. Styn at Central.

492 03/10/2016 Motion Hearing to Certify/Decertify Class Action scheduledfor 05/27/2016 at 02:00:00 PM at Central in C-62 Ronald L.Styn.

493 02/25/2016 Stipulation - Other - Fee Due (and Order RegardingRescheduling the Hearing on Plaintiffs' Motion for ClassCertification) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl;Apple Inc; Muse, Jeffrey.

Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);Rysdyk, Daryl (Plaintiff); AppleInc (Defendant); Muse, Jeffrey(Plaintiff)


495 03/15/2016 Matter decided.496 03/15/2016 Miscellaneous Minute Order Finalized.497 03/15/2016 Clerk's Certificate of Service By Mail (Minutes Only) SD

generated.498 03/22/2016 Returned Mail (Copy of Court's 03/15/16 Minute Order to

the Willow Creek Road Address / Attempted Not Known)filed by The Superior Court of San Diego.Refers to: Hail, James



500 03/29/2016 Motion to Certify Class filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,Daryl.









505 04/08/2016 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 05/27/2016 at 02:00:00PM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.

506 04/08/2016 Motion - Other (Motion to Seal Confidential Portions ofPlaintiff's Amended Motion for Class Certification) filed byApple Inc.




507 04/08/2016 Declaration - Other (Declaration of Scott B. Murray inSupport of Motion to Seal Confidential Portions of Plaintiffs'Amended Motion for Class Certification) filed by Apple Inc.


508 04/08/2016 Order - Other (Proposed Order) submitted by Apple Increceived but not filed on 04/08/2016.


509 04/08/2016 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)510 04/18/2016 Opposition to Noticed Motion and Supporting Declarations

filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Shamrell, Anthony; Shamrell,Anthony; Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl; Rysdyk, Daryl;Rysdyk, Daryl; Rysdyk, Daryl; Muse, Jeffrey.

Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);Rysdyk, Daryl (Plaintiff)

511 04/18/2016 Declaration - Other filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Shamrell,Anthony; Shamrell, Anthony; Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,Daryl; Rysdyk, Daryl; Rysdyk, Daryl; Rysdyk, Daryl; Muse,Jeffrey.


512 04/18/2016 Objections filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Shamrell, Anthony;Shamrell, Anthony; Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl;Rysdyk, Daryl; Rysdyk, Daryl; Rysdyk, Daryl; Muse, Jeffrey.



514 04/22/2016 The Motion Hearing (Civil) was rescheduled to 05/27/2016at 02:00:00 PM in C-62 before Ronald L. Styn at Central.


517 04/29/2016 Motion - Other (TO SEAL CONFIDENTIAL PORTIONS OFOPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS AMENDED MOTION FORCLASS CERTIFICATION AND SUPPORTINGDOCUMENTS) filed by Apple Inc.


518 04/29/2016 Declaration - Other (OF SCOTT B. MURRAY) filed by AppleInc.


519 04/29/2016 Order - Other (Proposed) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)520 04/29/2016 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)521 04/29/2016 Order - Other (Proposed) submitted by Apple Inc received

but not filed on 04/29/2016.Apple Inc (Defendant)



523 04/29/2016 Notice of Lodgment filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)524 04/29/2016 Objections filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)525 04/29/2016 Declaration - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)526 04/29/2016 Declaration - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)527 04/29/2016 Declaration - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)528 04/29/2016 Declaration - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)529 04/29/2016 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)530 04/29/2016 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)531 05/24/2016 The Motion Hearing to Certify/Decertify Class Action was









537 05/18/2016 Stipulation - Other - Fee Due (Joint Stipulation and OrderRegarding Hearing Date for Plaintiffs' Motion for ClassCertification and Partial Briefing Schedule) filed by AppleInc; Muse, Jeffrey; Rysdyk, Daryl; Shamrell, Anthony.

Apple Inc (Defendant); Muse,Jeffrey (Plaintiff); Rysdyk, Daryl(Plaintiff); Shamrell, Anthony(Plaintiff)

538 06/24/2016 Objections (Plaintiffs' Objections to The Declaration of ScottB. Murray ISO Motion to Seal Documents From SummaryJudgment) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


539 06/24/2016 Objections (Plaintiffs' Objections to the Declaration of ScottB. Murray ISO Apple Motion to Seal Written Objections)filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.




541 06/24/2016 Opposition - Other filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,Daryl.






544 06/28/2016 Notice of Lodgment (Plaintiff's NOTICE OF LODGMENTREGARDING PLAINTIFF'S REPLY RE AMENDEDMOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


545 06/28/2016 Reply (PLAINTIFF'S REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OFAMENDED MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION) filedby Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


546 06/28/2016 Response (PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO APPLE'S EVID.OBJ. TO DECL.OF HEATHER H. XITCO IN SUPPORT OFPLAINTIFFS' AMENDED MOTION FOR CLASSCERTIFICATION AND TESTIMONY OF CHARLES M.CURLEY) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


547 06/28/2016 Motion to Strike (PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO STRIKE ANDEVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO THE DECLARATION OFLOREN HITT IN SUPPORT OF APPLE'S OPPOSITION TOPLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION) filedby Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


548 06/28/2016 Objections (PLAINTIFFS' OBJECTIONS TO THEDECLARATION OF WILLIAM SHEARIN IN SUPPORT OFAPPLE INC.'S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTIONFOR CLASS CERTIFICATION) filed by Shamrell, Anthony;Rysdyk, Daryl.


549 06/28/2016 Objections (PLAINTIFFS' OBJECTIONS TO THEDECLARATION OF SHANHARI SIVAGNANASUNDARAMSUBMITTED IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS'AMENDED MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION) filedby Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


550 06/28/2016 Declaration - Other (DECLARATION OF CHRIS W.CANTRELL ISO PLAINTIFFS' REPLY TO AMENDEDMOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


551 06/28/2016 Proof of Service (Proof Of Service) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


552 06/30/2016 Notice of Lodgment (Notice of Lodgment re Apple Inc'sReply ISO Motion to Seal Confidential Portions of (1) Replyto MSJ and Supporting Docs and (2) Pltfs Oppo to Def MSJand Supporting Docs) filed by Apple Inc.


553 06/30/2016 Declaration - Other (Supplemental Dec of Scott B. MurrayISO Mot To Seal Confidential Portions of (1) Reply to MSJand Supporting Docs and (2) Pltfs Oppo to Defts MSJ andSupporting Docs (Redacted)) filed by Apple Inc.




554 06/30/2016 Reply to Opposition of Noticed Motion and SupportingDeclarations (Apple Inc.'s Reply ISO Motion to SealConfidential Portions of (1) Reply to MSJ and SupportingDocs and (2) Pltfs Oppo to Def MSJ and Supporting Docs(Redacted)) filed by Apple Inc.


555 06/30/2016 Proposed Order ([Amended Proposed] Order GrantingApple's Mot to Seal Confidential Portions of (1) Reply toMSJ and Supporting Docs and (2) Pltfs Oppo to Def MSJand Supporting Docs) submitted by Apple Inc received butnot filed on 06/30/2016.


556 06/30/2016 Proof of Service (Proof of Service by One Legal) filed byApple Inc.


557 06/30/2016 Proof of Service (Proof of Service by Federal Express) filedby Apple Inc.





560 07/05/2016 Declaration - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)561 07/05/2016 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)562 07/05/2016 Notice of Lodgment filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)563 07/05/2016 Declaration - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)564 07/05/2016 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)565 07/05/2016 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)566 07/05/2016 Motion - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)567 07/05/2016 Declaration - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)568 07/05/2016 Proposed Order submitted by Apple Inc received but not

filed on 07/05/2016.Apple Inc (Defendant)

569 07/05/2016 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)570 07/06/2016 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 07/08/2016 at 08:30:00


AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.572 07/06/2016 The Motion Hearing (Civil) was rescheduled to 07/08/2016

at 02:00:00 PM in C-62 before Ronald L. Styn at Central.573 07/06/2016 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 07/08/2016 at 02:00:00

PM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.574 07/06/2016 The Motion Hearing (Civil) was rescheduled to 07/08/2016

at 02:00:00 PM in C-62 before Ronald L. Styn at Central.575 07/06/2016 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 07/08/2016 at 02:00:00

PM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.576 07/06/2016 Objections filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);

Rysdyk, Daryl (Plaintiff)577 07/06/2016 Proof of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);

Rysdyk, Daryl (Plaintiff)578 07/06/2016 Miscellaneous Minute Order Finalized.579 07/07/2016 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.580 07/07/2016 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.581 07/07/2016 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.582 07/07/2016 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.583 07/07/2016 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing to Certify/Decertify

Class Action published.584 07/08/2016 Matter taken under submission.585 07/08/2016 Minutes finalized for Motion Hearing to Certify/Decertify

Class Action heard 07/08/2016 02:00:00 PM.586 07/08/2016 Minutes finalized for Motion Hearing (Civil) heard

07/08/2016 02:00:00 PM.






590 07/08/2016 Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (AbigailTorres - Granted) filed by The Superior Court of San Diego.

591 07/14/2016 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 09/23/2016 at 08:30:00AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn was vacated.

592 07/14/2016 Matter decided.593 07/14/2016 Miscellaneous Minute Order Finalized.594 07/14/2016 Clerk's Certificate of Service By Mail (Minutes Only) SD

generated.595 07/14/2016 Motion Hearing to Certify/Decertify Class Action scheduled

for 12/09/2016 at 08:30:00 AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L.Styn.


generated.598 08/09/2016 Miscellaneous Minute Order Finalized.599 08/09/2016 Clerk's Certificate of Service By Mail (Minutes Only) SD

generated.600 08/15/2016 Request for Out of State Commission submitted by

Shamrell, Anthony rejected on 08/15/2016.Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff)

601 08/15/2016 Returned Mail (Copy of 08/09/16 Minute Order to the WillowCreek Address - Return to Sender, Not at this address) filedby The Superior Court of San Diego.

602 08/19/2016 Request for Out of State Commission (issued 8/23/16) filedby Shamrell, Anthony.


603 02/05/2016 Order - Other (Order Granting Apple Inc.'s Motion to SealConfidential Portions of Defendant's Apple Inc.'s Motion forSummary Judgment and Supporting Documents) filed byApple Inc.


604 02/05/2016 Notice of Sealed Document (Re: Confidential Portions ofDefendants Apple Incs Motion for Summary Judgment andSupporting Documents) filed by Apple Inc.


605 06/26/2015 Notice - Other (Notice of Motion and Motion for SummaryJudgment (Unredacted / Sealed)) filed by Apple Inc.


606 06/26/2015 Declaration - Other (Declaration of William Shearin InSupport of Apple Incs Motion for Summary Judgment(Unredacted / Sealed)) filed by Apple Inc.


607 06/26/2015 Declaration - Other (Declaration of ShanhariSivagnanasundaram In Support of Motion for SummaryJudgment (Unredacted / Sealed)) filed by Apple Inc.


608 06/26/2015 Declaration - Other (Declaration of Devin P. Alavian inSupport of Apple Incs Motion for Summary Judgment(Unredacted / Sealed)) filed by Apple Inc.


609 06/26/2015 Statement of Undisputed Facts (Apples Separate Statementof Undisputed Facts In Support of Motion for SummaryJudgment (Unredacted / Sealed)) filed by Apple Inc.


610 09/06/2016 Declaration - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)611 09/09/2016 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 11/18/2016 at 08:30:00


AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn was vacated.613 09/14/2016 Ex Parte scheduled for 09/21/2016 at 08:30:00 AM at

Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.



614 09/20/2016 Ex Parte Application - Other and Supporting Documents (ExParte Application of Defendant Apple, Inc's to ContinueHearing Date and Modify Briefing Schedule; Memorandumof Points and Authorities in Support Thereof) filed by AppleInc.


615 09/20/2016 Declaration - Other (Declaration of Matthew D. Powers ISOApples Inc's., Ex Parte Application to Continue HearingDate and Modify Briefing Schedule) filed by Apple Inc.


616 09/20/2016 Proposed Order ([Proposed] Order Granting Apple Inc.'s ExParte Application to Continue Hearing Date and ModifyBriefing Schedule) submitted by Apple Inc received but notfiled on 09/20/2016.


617 09/20/2016 Proof of Service (Proof Of Service) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)619 09/21/2016 Motion Hearing to Certify/Decertify Class Action scheduled

for 01/06/2017 at 08:30AM before Judge Ronald L. Styn.620 09/21/2016 Minutes finalized for Ex Parte heard 09/21/2016 08:30:00

AM.621 09/21/2016 Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (Abigail R.

Torres - Granted) filed by The Superior Court of San Diego.622 10/20/2016 Recommendation and Order of Discovery Referee (RE

Motion to Compel Production of Docs; and Motions to Seal)submitted by May, Robert E received but not filed on10/20/2016.





generated.628 11/01/2016 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 05/12/2017 at 08:30:00

AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.629 11/03/2016 Recommendation and Order of Discovery Referee

(Recommendation Regarding (1) Plaintiffs Motion toCompel Production of Documents (2) Apples Motions toSeal Portions of Certain Documents (SIGNED)) filed byMay, Robert E.


630 11/03/2016 Clerk's Certificate of Service By Mail SD generated.631 11/04/2016 Ex Parte scheduled for 11/22/2016 at 08:30:00 AM at

Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.632 11/07/2016 Motion Hearing to Certify/Decertify Class Action scheduled

for 05/12/2017 at 08:30:00 AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L.Styn was vacated.

633 11/07/2016 Motion Hearing to Certify/Decertify Class Action scheduledfor 12/09/2016 at 08:30:00 AM at Central in C-62 Ronald L.Styn was vacated.

634 10/29/2014 Amended Complaint (UNREDACTED - SEALED - ThirdAmended Class Action Complaint) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl; Muse, Jeffrey.Refers to: Apple Inc


635 10/28/2016 Notice of Sealed Document (RE: Third Amended ClassAction Complaint sealed per 10/28/16 Minute Order) filed byApple Inc.


636 04/07/2014 Amended Complaint (UNREDACTED - SEALED - SecondAmended Class Action Complaint) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.Refers to: Apple Inc


637 05/07/2014 Notice - Other (SEALED - Apples Demurrer to PlaintiffsSecond Amended Class Action Complaint) filed by AppleInc.




638 05/07/2014 Request - Other (SEALED - Exhbit A to Request for JudicialNotice In Support of Apples Demurrer to Plaintiffs SecondAmended Complaint) filed by Apple Inc.


639 05/29/2014 Notice - Other (SEALED - Plaintiffs Motion to Compel) filedby Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


640 05/29/2014 Notice - Other (SEALED - Plaintiffs Motion for Leave toAmend) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


641 10/28/2016 Notice of Sealed Document (Re: Documents a through eper Courts 10/28/16 Minute Order) filed by Apple Inc.


642 06/06/2014 Opposition - Other (SEALED - Plaintiffs Opposition toApples Demurrer) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,Daryl.


643 06/16/2014 Opposition - Other (SEALED - Apples Opposition toPlaintiffs Motion to Compel) filed by Apple Inc.


644 06/16/2014 Declaration - Other (SEALED - Declaration of Matthew DPowers In Support of Dfdts Oppositions To Pltfs Motion toCompel) filed by Apple Inc.


645 06/16/2014 Declaration - Other (SEALED - Declaration of Allan CoulsonIn Support of Apples Oppositions to Pltfs Motion to Compeland Motion for Leave to Amend) filed by Apple Inc.


646 06/16/2014 Statement - Other (SEALED - Apples Separate Statementin Opposition to Pltfs Motion to Compel Production ofDocuments and Further Responses to Interrogs (Set 1))filed by Apple Inc.


647 10/28/2016 Notice of Sealed Document (Re: Documents f through j perCourt's 10/28/16 Minute Order) filed by Apple Inc.


648 06/16/2014 Opposition - Other (SEALED - Apples Opposition to PltfsMotion for Leave to Amend) filed by Apple Inc.


649 07/01/2014 Reply (SEALED - Apples Reply in Support of Demurrer)filed by Apple Inc.


650 07/01/2014 Reply (SEALED - Plaintiffs Reply in Support of Motion toCompel) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


651 07/01/2014 Reply (SEALED - Plaintiffs Reply in Support of Motion forLeave to Amend) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


652 07/01/2014 Declaration - Other (SEALED - Supplemental Declaration ofChris W. Cantrell in further support of Pltfs Motion toCompel and Motion for Leave to Amend) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


653 10/28/2016 Notice of Sealed Document (Re: Documents k through oPer Court's 10/28/16 Minute Order) filed by Apple Inc.


654 07/01/2014 Opposition - Other (SEALED - Pltfs Evidentiary Objectionsto the Declaration of Allan Coulson in Support of ApplesOppostions to Pltfs Motion for Leave to Amend and Motionto Compel) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


655 07/09/2014 Reply (SEALED - Apples Responses to Pltfs EvidentiaryObjections to the Declaration of Allan Coulson in Support ofApples Oppositions to Pltfs Moiton for Leave to Amend anMotion to Compel) filed by Apple Inc.


656 07/09/2014 Declaration - Other (SEALED - Exhibit A to Declaration ofMatthew D Powers in Support of Apples Responses to PltfsEvidentiary Objections to the Declaration of Allan Coulsonin support of Apples Oppositions to Pltfs Mtn for Leave toAmend and Mtn to Compel) filed by Apple Inc.


657 10/28/2016 Notice of Sealed Document (Re: Documents p through rPer Court's 10/28/16 Mintue Order) filed by Apple Inc.


658 10/28/2016 Notice of Sealed Document (Re: Documents s and t PerCourt's 10/28/16 Minute Order) filed by Apple Inc.


659 07/09/2014 Declaration - Other (SEALED - Supplemental Declaration ofAllan Coulson in Support of Apples Motion for Leave toAmend and Motion to Compel) filed by Apple Inc.




660 05/29/2014 Declaration - Other (Declaration of Chris W. Cantrell inSupport of Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel (FILED PERCOURT'S 10/28/16 MINUTE ORDER)) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


661 05/29/2014 Statement - Other (Plaintiffs Separate Statement ofDisputed First Set of Requests for Production and SpecialInterrogatories (FILED PER COURT'S 10/28/16 MINUTEORDER)) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


662 05/29/2014 Statement - Other (Plaintiffs Separate Statement ofDisputed Requests for Production (Set 2) and SpecialInterrogatories (FILED PER COURT'S 10/28/16 MINUTEORDER)) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


663 05/29/2014 Declaration - Other (Declaration of Chris W. Cantrell inSupport of Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to Amend (FILEDPER COURT'S 10/28/16 MINUTE ORDER)) filed byShamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


664 11/21/2016 Ex Parte Application - Other and Supporting Documents(Joint Ex Parte Application To COntinue Hearing Date andSupporting Documents) filed by Shamrell, Anthony;Shamrell, Anthony; Shamrell, Anthony; Shamrell, Anthony;Rysdyk, Daryl; Rysdyk, Daryl; Rysdyk, Daryl; Rysdyk,Daryl.


665 11/21/2016 Proposed Order ([Proposed] Order Resetting PlainitffsMotion For Class Certification) submitted by Shamrell,Anthony; Shamrell, Anthony; Shamrell, Anthony; Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl; Rysdyk, Daryl; Rysdyk, Daryl;Rysdyk, Daryl received but not filed on 11/21/2016.


666 11/21/2016 Declaration - Other (Declaration Of Chris W. Cantrell ISOJoint ExParte Application) filed by Shamrell, Anthony;Shamrell, Anthony; Shamrell, Anthony; Shamrell, Anthony;Rysdyk, Daryl; Rysdyk, Daryl; Rysdyk, Daryl; Rysdyk,Daryl.


669 11/22/2016 Motion Hearing to Certify/Decertify Class Action continuedpursuant to party's motion to 02/10/2017 at 08:30AM beforeJudge Ronald L. Styn.

670 11/22/2016 Minutes finalized for Ex Parte heard 11/22/2016 08:30:00AM.


generated.673 11/03/2016 Notice of Sealed Document (Documents Sealed per Rec &

Order signed on 11/03/16) filed by Apple Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)

674 01/28/2016 Objections (UNREDACTED / SEALED - Defendant AppleInc.'s Written Objections to the Declarations of FredSchenkelberg, Anthony Shamrell, and Daryl Rysdyk inSupport of Plaintiffs' Opposition to Apple's Motion forSummary Judgment AND Proposed Order) filed by AppleInc.


675 11/03/2016 Notice of Sealed Document (Documents Sealed per Rec &Order signed on 11/03/16) filed by Apple Inc.


676 11/03/2016 Notice of Sealed Document (Documents Sealed per Rec &Order signed on 11/03/16) filed by Apple Inc.


677 01/22/2016 Reply (UNREDACTED / SEALED - Reply In Support ofDefendant Apple Incs MSJ or in the alternative MSA andMotion for CC 1781(c)(3)) filed by Apple Inc.


678 01/22/2016 Reply (UNREDACTED / SEALED - Defendant Apple Inc.'sReply in Support of Separate Statement of UndisputedMaterial Facts) filed by Apple Inc.


679 01/22/2016 Opposition - Other (UNREDACTED / SEALED - DefendantApple Inc.'s Opposition t Plaintiffs' Separate Statement ofAdditional Facts) filed by Apple Inc.




680 01/22/2016 Declaration - Other (UNREDACTED / SEALED -Declaration of Matthew D. Powers in Support of Apple's (1)Objections to Pltfs Evidence (2) Response to PltfsObjections to Apples Evidence, and (3) Opposition to PltfsSeperate Statement of Additional Facts Re ApplesMSJ/MSA) filed by Apple Inc.


681 01/22/2016 Objections (UNREDACTED / SEALED - Defendant AppleInc.'s Objections to the Declaration of Fred Schenkelberg inSupport of Plaintiff's Opposition to Apples MSJ) filed byApple Inc.


682 01/22/2016 Objections (UNREDACTED / SEALED - Defendant AppleInc.'s Objections to the Declaration of Daryl Rysdyk andAnthony Shamrell in support of Plaintiff's Opposition toApples MSJ) filed by Apple Inc.


683 01/22/2016 Response (UNREDACTED / SEALED - Defendant AppleInc.'s Response to Plaintiffs' Objections to Evidence andPortions of Declarations of William Shearin, Shanhari,Sivagnanasundaram, and Devin P. Alavian in Support ofPlaintiffs Opposition to Defendant's MSJ) filed by Apple Inc.


684 11/03/2016 Notice of Lodgment (Documents Sealed per Rec & Ordersigned on 11/03/16) filed by Apple Inc.


685 11/03/2016 Notice of Lodgment (Documents Sealed Per Rec & Ordersigned on 11/03/16) filed by Apple Inc.


686 01/03/2017 Notice of Lodgment (RE Plaintiffs Supplemental Brief inSupport of Amended Motion for Class Certification) filed byShamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


687 01/03/2017 Brief - Other (Supplemental Brief in Support of AmendedMotion for Class Certification) filed by Shamrell, Anthony;Rysdyk, Daryl.


688 01/03/2017 Declaration - Other (of Chris W Cantrell) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


689 01/03/2017 Declaration - Other (of Heather H Xitco) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.



691 01/15/2016 Memorandum of Points and Authorities (UNREDACTED /SEALED - Plaintiffs' Memorandum or Points and Authoritiesin Opposition to Defendant Apple Inc.'s Motion for SummaryJudgment) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


692 01/15/2016 Statement - Other (UNREDACTED / SEALED - Plaintiffs'Separate Statement of Material Facts in Opposition toApple's Motion for Summary Judgment or alternativelySummary Adudication) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,Daryl.


694 01/15/2016 Declaration - Other (UNREDACTED / SEALED -Declaration of Chris W. Cantrell in Support of Plaintiffs'Opposition to Apple's Motion for Summary Judgment oralternatively Summary Adjudication) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


695 01/13/2017 Notice - Other (APPLE INCS NOTICE OF FILING) filed byApple Inc.


696 01/13/2017 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)697 01/13/2017 Notice of Lodgment filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,



699 01/13/2017 [Another document for ROA# 699]699 01/13/2017 [Another document for ROA# 699]699 01/13/2017 E-filing transaction partially accepted.700 01/17/2017 Declaration - Other filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,





702 01/24/2017 The Ex Parte was rescheduled to 01/31/2017 at 08:30:00AM in C-62 before Ronald L. Styn at Central.


704 01/27/2017 Request - Other (Request for Commission - VerizonWireless) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


705 01/27/2017 Declaration - Other (of Deborah S Dixon in support ofRequest for Commission - Verizon Wireless) filed byShamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.



708 01/27/2017 Request - Other (Request for Commission - SprintCorporation) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


710 01/27/2017 Declaration - Other (of Deborah S Dixon in support ofRequest for Commission - Sprint Corporation) filed byShamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.



713 01/27/2017 Request - Other (Request for Commission - Best Buy CoInc) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


714 01/27/2017 Declaration - Other (of Deborah S Dixon in support ofRequest for Commission - Best Buy Co Inc) filed byShamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.



716 01/27/2017 Request - Other (Request for Commission - Walmart) filedby Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


717 01/27/2017 Declaration - Other (of Deborah S Dixon in support ofRequest for Commission - Walmart) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.



719 01/27/2017 Request - Other (Request for Commission - ATTCorporation) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


720 01/27/2017 Declaration - Other (of Deborah S Dixon in support ofRequest for Commission - ATT Corporation) filed byShamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.



722 01/30/2017 Ex Parte scheduled for 01/31/2017 at 08:30:00 AM atCentral in C-62 Ronald L. Styn was vacated.

723 01/31/2017 Request for Out of State Commission filed by Shamrell,Anthony.










728 02/02/2017 Response (to Plaintiffs Supplemental Brief in Support ofMotion for Class Certification) filed by Apple Inc.


729 02/02/2017 Notice of Lodgment (RE Apple Incs Response to PlaintiffsSupplemental Brief in Support of Motion for ClassCertification and Supporting Documents) filed by Apple Inc.




730 02/02/2017 Declaration - Other (of Kelsey Larson in Support ofDefendant Apple Incs Response to Plaintiffs SupplementalClass Certification Brief) filed by Apple Inc.


731 02/02/2017 Declaration - Other (of Alexis Chalklin-Sapsford in Supportof Apple Incs Response to Plaintiffs Supplemental Motionfor Class Certification) filed by Apple Inc.


732 02/02/2017 Declaration - Other (of Avi Sen in Support of Apple IncsResponse to Plaintiffs Supplemental Motion for ClassCertification) filed by Apple Inc.


733 02/02/2017 Declaration - Other (of Dr Lorin M Hitt in Support ofResponse of Defendant Apple Inc to Plaintiffs SupplementalBrief in Support of Motion for Class Certification) filed byApple Inc.


734 02/02/2017 Declaration - Other (of Dr Justin McCrary in Support ofResponse of Defendant Apple Inc to Plaintiffs SupplementalBrief in Support of Motion for Class Certification) filed byApple Inc.


735 02/02/2017 Objections (to the Declaration of Fred M Schenkelberg inSupport of Plaintiffs Supplemental Class Certification Brief)filed by Apple Inc.


736 02/02/2017 Objections (to the Supplemental Declaration of Heather HXitco in Support of Plaintiffs Supplemental ClassCertification Brief) filed by Apple Inc.


737 02/02/2017 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)738 02/02/2017 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)739 02/08/2017 Objections filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Shamrell, Anthony;

Shamrell, Anthony; Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl;Rysdyk, Daryl; Rysdyk, Daryl; Rysdyk, Daryl.


740 02/08/2017 Notice of Lodgment (REGARDING CORRECTEDDECLARATIONS) filed by Apple Inc.


741 02/08/2017 Declaration - Other (DR. LORIN M. HITT) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)742 02/08/2017 Declaration - Other (DR. JUSTIN MCCRARY) filed by Apple


743 02/08/2017 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)744 02/08/2017 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)745 02/09/2017 The Motion Hearing to Certify/Decertify Class Action was



747 02/09/2017 Recommendation and Order of Discovery Refereesubmitted by Apple Inc received but not filed on 02/09/2017.


748 02/09/2017 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing to Certify/DecertifyClass Action published.


752 02/10/2017 Minutes finalized for Motion Hearing to Certify/DecertifyClass Action heard 02/10/2017 02:00:00 PM.

753 02/10/2017 Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (Abigail R.Torres - Granted) filed by The Superior Court of San Diego.



generated.







generated.766 03/13/2017 Notice - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)767 03/13/2017 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)768 03/03/2017 Notice of Lodgment filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,


769 03/03/2017 Brief - Other filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);Rysdyk, Daryl (Plaintiff)






773 04/03/2017 Opposition - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)774 04/03/2017 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)775 03/30/2017 Motion - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)776 03/30/2017 Notice of Lodgment filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)777 03/30/2017 Opposition - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)778 03/30/2017 Declaration - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)779 03/30/2017 Declaration - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)780 03/30/2017 Declaration - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)781 03/30/2017 Declaration - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)782 03/30/2017 Declaration - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)783 03/30/2017 Objections filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)784 03/30/2017 Objections filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)785 03/30/2017 Objections filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)786 03/30/2017 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)787 03/30/2017 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)788 04/07/2017 Notice of Lodgment (RE Second Supplemental Reply

Documents Filed in Support of Plaintiffs Amended Motionfor Class Certification) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,Daryl.


789 04/07/2017 Reply (in Support of Supplemental Submission REEvidence of Aggregate Damages) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


790 04/07/2017 Response (to Defendant Apple Incs Written Objections tothe Second Supplemental Declaration of Heather H Xitco inSupport of Plaintiffs Supplemental Submission in Support ofAmended Motion for Class Certification) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


791 04/07/2017 Opposition - Other (to Apples Written Objections to theDeclaration of Gregory Pinsonneault) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.




792 04/07/2017 Response (to Defendant Apple Incs Written Objections tothe Declaration of Ramamirtham Sukumar in Support ofPlaintiffs Supplemental Evidentiary Submission) filed byShamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


793 04/07/2017 Response (to the Declarations of Dr Lorin M Hitt Dr JustinMccrary and Dr olivier Toubia in Support of Opposition ofDefendant Apple Inc to 2nd Supplemental Submission inSupport of Motion for Class Certification) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


794 04/07/2017 Objections (to the Supplemental Declaration of AlexisChalklin-Sapsford in Support of Apple Incs Opposition toPlaintiffs 2nd Supplemental Motion for Class Certification)filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


795 04/07/2017 Declaration - Other (Reply Declaration of RamamirthamSukumar in Support of Plaintiffs Supplemental EvidentiarySubmission) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.



797 04/11/2017 Objections filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)798 04/11/2017 Objections filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)799 04/11/2017 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)800 04/13/2017 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing to Certify/Decertify

Class Action published.801 04/14/2017 Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (Abigail

Torres - Granted) filed by The Superior Court of San Diego.803 04/14/2017 Civil Case Management Conference scheduled for

06/23/2017 at 11:00AM before Judge Ronald L. Styn.804 04/14/2017 Minutes finalized for Motion Hearing to Certify/Decertify

Class Action heard 04/14/2017 02:00:00 PM.805 04/14/2017 Notice of Hearing SD generated.806 04/17/2017 Notice - Other (Notice of Filing of Motion) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)807 05/09/2017 Miscellaneous Minute Order Finalized.808 05/09/2017 Clerk's Certificate of Service By Mail (Minutes Only) SD

generated.809 05/09/2017 Order - Other (Order Granting Mot Seal Confidential

Portions of Pltfs Supp Submission re Evidence ofAggregate Damages and Decs ISO Pltfs Supp Submission)filed by Apple Inc.


810 05/09/2017 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)811 05/09/2017 Order - Other (Order Granting Apple's Unopposed Mot Seal

Confidential Portions of Corrected Decs ISO Apple'sResponse to Pltfs Supp Class Cert Brief) filed by Apple Inc.


812 05/09/2017 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)813 05/09/2017 Order - Other (Order Granting Apple's Unopposed Mot Seal

Confidential Portions of Pltfs Supp Brief ISO AmendedClass Cert Mot and Decs ISO Pltfs Supp Brief) filed byApple Inc.


814 05/09/2017 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)815 05/11/2017 Order - Other (Granting Apple Inc.'s Unopposed Motion to

Seal Confidential Portions of Plaintiffs' (1) Reply Brief, et al.)filed by Apple Inc.


816 05/11/2017 Order - Other (Granting Apple Inc.'s Unopposed Motion toSeal Confidential Portions of (1) Apple Inc.'s Opposition toPlaintiffs' Second Supplemental Submission In Support OfClass Certification, et al.) filed by Apple Inc.


817 05/11/2017 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)818 06/06/2017 Order - Other (Order Granting Apple Inc.'s Unopposed

Motion To Seal) filed by Apple Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)



819 06/19/2017 Case Management Statement filed by Shamrell, Anthony;Rysdyk, Daryl.



821 06/23/2017 Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (Abigail R.Torres - Granted) filed by The Superior Court of San Diego.

825 06/23/2017 Status Conference (Civil) scheduled for 09/21/2017 at02:00PM before Judge Ronald L. Styn.

826 06/23/2017 Civil Jury Trial scheduled for 03/09/2018 at 09:30AM beforeJudge Ronald L. Styn.

827 06/23/2017 Trial Readiness Conference (Civil) scheduled for02/23/2018 at 09:30AM before Judge Ronald L. Styn.

828 06/23/2017 Minutes finalized for Civil Case Management Conferenceheard 06/23/2017 11:00:00 AM. (Subsequently amended -See ROA # 834)

829 06/23/2017 Notice of Hearing SD generated.830 06/23/2017 Notice of Hearing SD generated.831 06/23/2017 Notice of Hearing SD generated.833 06/23/2017 Status Conference (Civil) scheduled for 12/21/2017 at

02:00PM before Judge Ronald L. Styn.834 06/23/2017 Minutes finalized for Civil Case Management Conference

heard 06/23/2017 11:00:00 AM. (As Amended)835 06/23/2017 Notice of Hearing SD generated.836 06/28/2017 Status Conference (Civil) scheduled for 09/21/2017 at

02:00:00 PM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn wasvacated.

837 06/29/2017 Order (Court of Appeal Order) filed by The Superior Courtof San Diego.

838 11/30/2017 The Status Conference (Civil) was rescheduled to12/21/2017 at 01:30:00 PM in C-62 before Ronald L. Stynat Central.

839 11/30/2017 Status Conference (Civil) scheduled for 12/21/2017 at01:30:00 PM at Central in C-62 Ronald L. Styn.

840 12/18/2017 Case Management Statement filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)841 12/20/2017 The Status Conference (Civil) was rescheduled to

12/20/2017 at 02:00:00 PM in C-62 before Ronald L. Stynat Central.


847 12/20/2017 Civil Jury Trial set for 03/09/18 at 9:30 AM vacated.848 12/20/2017 Trial Readiness Conference (Civil) set for 02/23/18 at 9:30

AM vacated.849 12/20/2017 Status Conference (Civil) continued pursuant to Court's

motion to 03/16/2018 at 11:00AM before Judge Ronald L.Styn.

850 12/20/2017 Minutes finalized for Status Conference (Civil) heard12/20/2017 02:00:00 PM.

851 12/20/2017 Notice of Rescheduled Hearing SD generated.852 03/09/2018 Case Management Statement filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)853 03/15/2018 The Status Conference (Civil) was rescheduled to

04/13/2018 at 02:00:00 PM in C-74 before Ronald L. Stynat Central.


855 04/11/2018 Case Management Statement filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)858 04/12/2018 Status Conference (Civil) continued pursuant to Court's

motion to 06/01/2018 at 02:00PM before Judge Ronald L.Styn.



859 04/12/2018 Miscellaneous Minute Order Finalized.860 04/12/2018 Notice of Rescheduled Hearing SD generated.861 05/29/2018 Remittitur filed by The Superior Court of San Diego.862 05/30/2018 Case Management Statement filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)864 06/01/2018 Motion Hearing to Certify/Decertify Class Action scheduled

for 10/26/2018 at 02:00PM before Judge Ronald L. Styn.865 06/01/2018 Minutes finalized for Status Conference (Civil) heard

06/01/2018 02:00:00 PM.866 06/01/2018 Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (Denise

Stires, CSR#4472) filed by The Superior Court of SanDiego.


generated.869 07/09/2018 Memorandum of Costs on Appeal filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)870 07/30/2018 The Motion Hearing to Certify/Decertify Class Action was



872 07/30/2018 The Motion Hearing to Certify/Decertify Class Action wasrescheduled to 11/16/2018 at 02:00:00 PM in C-74 beforeRonald L. Styn at Central.


874 07/31/2018 Stipulation - Other - Fee Due (Order re Briefing Schedulefor Class Certification Briefing, Post Remand) filed byShamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.



876 08/17/2018 Motion to Certify Class filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,Daryl.





879 08/17/2018 Brief - Other (Brief in Support of Supplemental Motion forClass Cerification) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,Daryl.


880 08/17/2018 Declaration - Other (Deborah S Dixon) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


881 08/27/2018 Motion - Other (to Seal Confidential Portions Plaintiffs Brief)filed by Apple Inc.


882 08/27/2018 Declaration - Other (Scott B Murray) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)883 08/27/2018 Proposed Order submitted by Apple Inc received but not


884 08/27/2018 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)885 10/18/2018 Notice of Lodgment filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)886 10/18/2018 Opposition - Other (to Motion for Class Certification) filed by


887 10/18/2018 Declaration - Other (E Clay Marquez) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)888 10/18/2018 Declaration - Other (Matthew Foster) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)889 10/18/2018 Declaration - Other (2nd Supplement Declaration from Dr

Justin McCarary) filed by Apple Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)

890 10/18/2018 Declaration - Other (THIRD SUPPLEMENTALDECLARATION OF DR. LORIN M. HITT) filed by Apple Inc.




891 10/18/2018 Declaration - Other (SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OFDR. OLIVIER TOUBIA) filed by Apple Inc.


892 10/18/2018 Objections (TO THE SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OFRAMAMIRTHAM SUKUMAR) filed by Apple Inc.


893 10/18/2018 Objections (TO THE SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OFGREGORY PINSONNEAULT) filed by Apple Inc.


894 10/18/2018 Objections (TO THE THIRD SUPPLEMENTALDECLARATION OF HEATHER H. XITCO) filed by AppleInc.


895 10/18/2018 Objections (TO THE SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OFFRED SCHENKELBERG) filed by Apple Inc.


896 10/18/2018 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)897 10/18/2018 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)898 10/18/2018 Motion - Other (to Seal Portions of Apple Inc's Opposition to

Plaintiffs' Brief) filed by Apple Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)

899 10/18/2018 Declaration - Other (of Scott B. Murray) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)900 10/18/2018 Proposed Order submitted by Apple Inc received but not


901 10/18/2018 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)902 11/14/2018 Objections filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)903 11/08/2018 Notice of Lodgment filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,


904 11/08/2018 Brief - Other filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl. Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);Rysdyk, Daryl (Plaintiff)














916 11/16/2018 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing to Certify/DecertifyClass Action published.

917 11/19/2018 Motion - Other (to Seal Confidential Portions of Plaintiff'sReply Brief) filed by Apple Inc.




920 11/19/2018 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)921 11/21/2018 Attachment - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)922 11/21/2018 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)923 11/21/2018 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)



924 11/21/2018 Motion - Other (to Seal Confidential Portions of Exhibit 1 toApple Inc's Supplemental Submission of Evidence insupport of Opposition to Plaintiffs' Supplemental Motion forClass Certification, Post Remand) filed by Apple Inc.




927 11/21/2018 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)928 11/16/2018 Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (Amorita

Ledesma - Granted) filed by The Superior Court of SanDiego.

929 11/16/2018 Minutes finalized for Motion Hearing to Certify/DecertifyClass Action heard 11/16/2018 02:00:00 PM.



932 12/31/2018 Notice of Change of Address / Telephone Number filed byShamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


933 12/31/2018 Proof of Service filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl. Shamrell, Anthony (Appellant);Rysdyk, Daryl (Appellant)



generated.938 01/07/2019 Notice of Hearing SD generated.939 02/22/2019 Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (Michelle

Neuenswander - Granted) filed by The Superior Court ofSan Diego.

944 02/22/2019 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 09/06/2019 at 02:00PMbefore Judge Ronald L. Styn.


946 02/22/2019 Civil Jury Trial scheduled for 10/25/2019 at 09:30AM beforeJudge Ronald L. Styn.

947 02/22/2019 Trial Readiness Conference (Civil) scheduled for10/04/2019 at 09:30AM before Judge Ronald L. Styn.


949 02/22/2019 Notice of Hearing SD generated.950 02/22/2019 Notice of Hearing SD generated.951 02/22/2019 Notice of Hearing SD generated.952 02/19/2019 Report - Other (Joint Status Conference Report) filed by



954 02/06/2019 Notice - Other (of Submitting Proposed Class NoticePursuant to the Court's January 7, 2019 Minute Order) filedby Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.




957 03/01/2019 Motion - Other (to Permit Late Filing of Jury Fee) filed byApple Inc.


958 03/01/2019 Declaration - Other (of Matthew D. Powers) filed by AppleInc.




959 03/01/2019 Proposed Order submitted by Apple Inc received but notfiled on 03/01/2019.


960 03/01/2019 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)961 02/27/2019 Notice - Other (Joint Proposed Class Notice Plan) filed by


962 03/12/2019 Order - Other (Approving Class Notice Plan) filed byShamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.



964 03/21/2019 Order (ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO SEAL BUTDENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE) filed byThe Superior Court of San Diego.





967 05/02/2019 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.970 05/03/2019 Motion Hearing (Civil) continued pursuant to Court's motion

to 05/10/2019 at 08:30AM before Judge Ronald L. Styn.971 05/03/2019 Minutes finalized for Motion Hearing (Civil) heard

05/03/2019 08:30:00 AM.972 05/03/2019 Notice of Rescheduled Hearing SD generated.973 05/09/2019 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.974 05/10/2019 Minutes finalized for Motion Hearing (Civil) heard

05/10/2019 08:25:00 AM.975 05/10/2019 Notice of Jury Fee Deposit filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)976 06/05/2019 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 07/12/2019 at 08:30:00


AM at Central in C-74 Ronald L. Styn was vacated.978 07/02/2019 Ex Parte scheduled for 07/09/2019 at 10:00:00 AM at

Central in C-74 Ronald L. Styn.979 07/08/2019 Motion - Other (to exclude the testimony and opinions of

defendant Apple Inc's expert Genevieve Nauhaus) filed byShamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


980 07/08/2019 Memorandum of Points and Authorities (in Support ofmotion to exclude the testimony of defendant Apple Inc'sexpert Genevieve Nauhaus) filed by Shamrell, Anthony;Rysdyk, Daryl.


981 07/08/2019 Motion - Other (to exclude the testimony and opinions ofdefendant Apple Inc's expert Justin McCrary) filed byShamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


982 07/08/2019 Memorandum of Points and Authorities (in Support ofmotion to exclude the testimony of defendant Apple Inc'sexpert Justin McCrary) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,Daryl.


983 07/08/2019 Declaration - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)984 07/08/2019 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)985 07/08/2019 Motion - Other (to exclude plaintiffs' expert Gregory

Pinsonneault) filed by Apple Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)

986 07/08/2019 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)987 07/08/2019 Motion - Other (to exclude plaintiffs' expert Charles Curley)


988 07/08/2019 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)989 07/09/2019 Ex Parte scheduled for 07/09/2019 at 10:00:00 AM at

Central in C-74 Ronald L. Styn was vacated.990 07/08/2019 Declaration - Other filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,







993 07/08/2019 Notice of Lodgment filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)994 07/08/2019 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)995 07/08/2019 Motion - Other (DEFENDANT APPLE INC.âS NOTICE OF

MOTION AND MOTION TO EXCLUDE) filed by Apple Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)

996 07/08/2019 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)997 07/08/2019 Motion - Other (NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO

EXCLUDE PLAINTIFFS' EXPERT FREDSCHENKELBERG) filed by Apple Inc.


998 07/08/2019 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)999 07/08/2019 Motion - Other (to seal confidential portions of (1) Apple

Inc's motion to exclude plaintiffs' expert Mr Curley, (2) AppleInc's motion t oexclude plaintiffs' expert Dr Pinsonneault)filed by Apple Inc.


1000 07/08/2019 Declaration - Other (of Scott B Murray) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)1001 07/08/2019 Proposed Order (granting Apple Inc's motion to seal

confidential portions of (1) plaintiffs' expert Mr. Curley, (2)Apple Inc's motion to exclude plaintiffs' expert DrPinsonneault) submitted by Apple Inc received but not filedon 07/08/2019.


1002 07/08/2019 Proof of Service (motion, declaration, proposed order) filedby Apple Inc.


1003 07/08/2019 Motion - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)1004 07/08/2019 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)1005 07/18/2019 Motion - Other (to seal confidential portions of (1) plaintiffs

memorandum in support of motion to exclude the testimonyof Justin McCrary and (2) declaration of Deborah S Dixon insupport thereof) filed by Apple Inc.


1006 07/18/2019 Declaration - Other (of Scott B Murray) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)1007 07/18/2019 Proposed Order (granting Apple Inc's motion to seal

confidential portions of (1) plaintiffs memorandum in supportof motion to exclude the testimony of Jutin McCrary and (2)declaration of Deborah S Dixon in support thereof)submitted by Apple Inc received but not filed on 07/18/2019.


1008 07/18/2019 Proof of Service (of motion to seal, declaration, proposedorder) filed by Apple Inc.


1009 07/23/2019 Discovery Hearing scheduled for 09/06/2019 at 02:00:00PM at Central in C-74 Ronald L. Styn.




1012 08/02/2019 Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (CynthiaDenise Stires - Granted) filed by The Superior Court of SanDiego.

1013 08/02/2019 Statement - Other (Plaintiffs' Proposed Trial Plan) filed byShamrell, Anthony.



1015 08/07/2019 Declaration - Other filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)1016 08/07/2019 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)1017 08/07/2019 Opposition - Other (to Motion Exclude Plaintiffs Expert

Charles Curley) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);Rysdyk, Daryl (Plaintiff)

1018 08/07/2019 Opposition - Other (to Motion to Exclude Plaintiffs ExpertGregory Pinsonneault) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,Daryl.




1019 08/07/2019 Opposition - Other (Motion to Exclude James A Roberts)filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


1020 08/07/2019 Opposition - Other (to Motion to Exclude Dr. RamamirthamSukumar) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


1021 08/07/2019 Declaration - Other (of Dr Ramamirtham Sukumar) filed byShamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


1022 08/07/2019 Opposition - Other (to Motion to Exclude Plaintiffs ExpertFred Schenkelberg) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,Daryl.


1023 08/07/2019 Declaration - Other (of Deborah S Dixon) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.





1026 08/07/2019 Opposition - Other (to Motion to Exclude the Testimony ofApples Expert Professor Justin McCrary) filed by Apple Inc.


1027 08/07/2019 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)1028 08/07/2019 Opposition - Other (to Motion to Exclude the Testtimony

and Opinions of Apples Expert Dr Genevieve Nauhaus)filed by Apple Inc.


1029 08/07/2019 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)1030 08/07/2019 Motion - Other (to seal confidential portions of (1) Apple

Inc's opposition to plaintiff's motino to exclude the testimonyof Apple's expert professor Justin McCrary) filed by AppleInc.


1031 08/07/2019 Declaration - Other (of Scott B Murray in support of AppleInc's motion to seal confidential portions of Apple Inc'sopposition) filed by Apple Inc.


1032 08/07/2019 Proposed Order (granting Apple Inc's motion to sealconfidential portions of Apple Inc's opposition) submitted byApple Inc received but not filed on 08/07/2019.


1033 08/07/2019 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)1034 08/07/2019 Notice of Lodgment filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)1035 08/07/2019 Proof of Service filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)1036 08/19/2019 Motion - Other (to seal confidential portions of plaintiffs'

oppositions to defendant Apple Inc's motions) filed by AppleInc.


1037 08/19/2019 Declaration - Other (of Scott B Murray in support of AppleInc's motion to seal confidential portions of plaintiffsoppositions to defendant Apple Inc's motions) filed by AppleInc.


1038 08/19/2019 Proposed Order (granting Apple Inc's motion to sealconfidential portions of plaintiffs oppositions to defendantApple Inc's motions) submitted by Apple Inc received butnot filed on 08/19/2019.


1039 08/19/2019 Proof of Service (of motion, declaratoin, proposed order)filed by Apple Inc.


1040 08/21/2019 Notice of Lodgment (in support of defendant Apple Inc'sreply brief in support of motions to exclude plaintiffsexperts) filed by Apple Inc.


1041 08/21/2019 Reply (brief in support of motion to exclude experttestimony of Fred Schenkelberg) filed by Apple Inc.


1042 08/21/2019 Reply (brief in support of motion to exclude experttestimony of Dr Ramamirtham Sukumar) filed by Apple Inc.


1043 08/21/2019 Reply (brief in support of motion to exclude experttestimony of James A Roberts) filed by Apple Inc.


1044 08/21/2019 Reply (brief in support of motion to exclude experttestimony of Charles Curley) filed by Apple Inc.




1045 08/21/2019 Reply (brief in support of motion to exclude experttestimony of Dr Gregory Pinsonneault) filed by Apple Inc.


1046 08/21/2019 Declaration - Other (of Kelsey M Larson in support ofdefendant Apple Inc's reply briefs) filed by Apple Inc.


1047 08/21/2019 Objections (to plaintiffs untimely declarations in support oftheir oppositions to Apple Inc's motions to exlcude expertsSukumar, Pinsonneault and Schenkelberg) filed by AppleInc.


1048 08/21/2019 Proof of Service (of notice of lodgment, reply, declaration,objections) filed by Apple Inc.


1049 08/21/2019 Motion - Other (to seal confidential portions of Apple Inc'sreply brief in support of motion to exclude plaintiffs ex pertCharles Curley) filed by Apple Inc.


1050 08/21/2019 Declaration - Other (Scott B Murray) filed by Apple Inc. Apple Inc (Defendant)1051 08/21/2019 Proposed Order (granting Apple Inc's motion to seal

confidential portions of Apple Inc's reply brief in support ofmotion) submitted by Apple Inc received but not filed on08/21/2019.


1052 08/21/2019 Proof of Service (of motion, declaratoin, proposed order)filed by Apple Inc.


1053 08/28/2019 Discovery Hearing scheduled for 09/06/2019 at 02:00:00PM at Central in C-74 Ronald L. Styn was vacated.

1054 08/21/2019 Reply (Memorandum in support of Motion to ExcludeTestimony of Apple's Expert Genevieve Nauhaus) filed byShamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


1055 08/21/2019 Reply (Memorandum in support of Motion to ExcludeTestimony of Apple's Expert Justin McCrary (Redacted))filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


1056 08/21/2019 Notice of Lodgment (in support of Motion to Exclude Apple'sExpert Justin McCrary) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,Daryl.



1060 09/03/2019 Motion Hearing (Civil) continued pursuant to party's motionto 09/13/2019 at 02:15PM before Judge Ronald L. Styn.

1061 09/03/2019 Miscellaneous Minute Order Finalized.1062 09/05/2019 Notice of Change of Address / Telephone Number filed by


1065 09/10/2019 Motion Hearing (Civil) continued pursuant to party's motionto 09/20/2019 at 02:00PM before Judge Ronald L. Styn.

1066 09/10/2019 Miscellaneous Minute Order Finalized.1067 09/19/2019 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 09/20/2019 at 02:00:00

PM at Central in C-74 Ronald L. Styn was vacated.1068 09/23/2019 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 11/01/2019 at 08:30:00

AM at Central in C-74 Ronald L. Styn.1070 10/04/2019 Civil Jury Trial set for 10/25/2019 at 09:30 am vacated.1071 10/04/2019 Minutes finalized for Trial Readiness Conference (Civil)

heard 10/04/2019 09:30:00 AM.1072 10/09/2019 Stipulation - Other - Fee Due (and Order Regarding Briefing

Schedule for Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Approval ofSettlement) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl;Apple Inc.

Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);Rysdyk, Daryl (Plaintiff); AppleInc (Defendant)



generated.1076 10/18/2019 OSC - Non-Sanction scheduled for 11/01/2019 at 08:30:00

AM at Central in C-74 Ronald L. Styn.



1077 01/15/2016 Opposition - Other (Plaintiffs' Objections to Evidence andPortions of Declarations... (filed per Court's 10/18/19 MO))filed by Shamrell, Anthony.


1078 01/15/2016 Order - Other (Proposed Order Regarding Objection toDeclarations ... (received per Court's 10/18/19 MO))submitted by Shamrell, Anthony received but not filed on01/15/2016.


1079 01/15/2016 Opposition - Other (Plaintiffs' Opposition to Apple'sSeparate State of Undisputed Material Facts in Support ofMSJ/MSA - (filed per Court's 10/18/19 MO)) filed byShamrell, Anthony.


1080 04/18/2016 Opposition - Other (Plaintiff's Opposition to DefendantApple's Inc's Motion to Seal - (filed per Court's 10/18/19MO)) filed by Shamrell, Anthony.


1081 04/18/2016 Declaration - Other (Declaration of Chris W. Cantrell InSupport of Plaintiffs Opposition to Defendant Apple Inc.'sMotion to Seal - (filed per Court's 10/18/19 MO)) filed byShamrell, Anthony.


1082 06/24/2016 Opposition - Other (Plaintiff's Opposition to Apple Inc'sMotion to Seal Portions of Summary Judgment Briefing andEvidence - (filed per Court's 10/18/19 MO)) filed byShamrell, Anthony.


1083 06/24/2016 Opposition - Other (Plaintiffs' Opposition to DefendantApple Inc's Motion to Seal Portions of Written Objections toSchenkelberg, Shamrell, and Rysdyk Declarations - (filedper Court's 10/18/19 MO)) filed by Shamrell, Anthony.


1085 06/24/2016 Declaration - Other (Declaration of Chris W. Cantrell inSupport of Plaintiffs' Opposition to Defendant Apple Inc.'sMotion to Seal - (filed per Court's 10/18/19 MO)) filed byShamrell, Anthony.


1086 06/30/2016 Reply (Apple Inc's Reply in Support of Motion to SealConfidential Portions of (1) Reply to MSJ... and (2) PlaintiffsOpposition to Defendants MSJ... - (filed per Court's10/18/19 MO)) filed by Apple Inc.


1087 06/30/2016 Declaration - Other (Supplemental Declaration of Scott B.Murray in support of Motion to Seal Confidential Portions of(1) Reply to MSJ... and (2) Pltfs Opposition to Dfdts MSJ... -(filed per Court's 10/18/19 MO)) filed by Apple Inc.


1088 05/09/2017 Notice of Sealed Document (Re: Documents Sealed perOrder signed on 05/09/2017 (ROA#809)) filed by Apple Inc.


1089 03/03/2017 Brief - Other ((Unredacted/Sealed Version) - PlaintiffsSupplemental Submission Re Evidence of AggregateDamages) filed by Shamrell, Anthony.


1090 03/03/2017 Declaration - Other (Unredacted / Sealed Version -Supplemental Declaration of Deborah Dixon in support ofPlaintiffs Amended Motion for Class Certification) filed byShamrell, Anthony.


1091 03/03/2017 Declaration - Other (Unredacted/Sealed Version -Declaration of Gregory Pinsonneault In Support of PlaintiffsSUpplemental Submission Regarding Evidence ofAggregate Damages) filed by Shamrell, Anthony.


1092 03/03/2017 Declaration - Other (Unredacted/Sealed Version - SecondSupplemental Declaration of Heather H. Xitco in support ofPlaintiffs' Supplemental Submission in Support of AmendedMotion for Class Certification) filed by Shamrell, Anthony.


1093 05/09/2017 Notice of Sealed Document (Re: Documents Sealed perOrder signed on 05/09/2017 (ROA#811)) filed by Apple Inc.


1094 02/08/2017 Declaration - Other (Unredacted/Sealed Version - CorrectedSupplemental Declaration of Dr. Lorin M. Hitt in Support ofResponse of Defendant Apple Inc. to Plaintiffs'Supplemental Brief in Support of Motion for ClassCertification) filed by Apple Inc.




1095 02/08/2017 Declaration - Other (Unredacted/Sealed Version - CorrectedDeclaration of Dr. Justin McCrary in Support of Response ofDefendant Aple Inc. to Plaintiffs' Supplemental Brief inSupport of Motion for Class Certification) filed by Apple Inc.


1096 06/06/2017 Notice of Sealed Document (Re: Documents Sealed perOrder signed on 06/06/2017 (ROA #818) - Page 1 of 3 -)filed by Apple Inc.


1097 06/06/2017 Notice of Sealed Document (Re: Documents Sealed perOrder signed on 06/06/2017 (ROA #818) - Page 2 of 3) filedby Apple Inc.


1098 06/06/2017 Notice of Sealed Document (Re: Documents Sealed perOrder signed on 06/06/2017 (ROA #818) - Page 3 of 3) filedby Apple Inc.


1099 02/02/2017 Reply (Unredacted/Sealed Version - Response ofDefendant Apple Inc. to Plaintiffs' Supplemental Brief inSupport of Motion for Class Certification) filed by Apple Inc.


1100 02/02/2017 Declaration - Other (Unredacted/Sealed Version -Declaration of Avi Sen in Support of Apple Inc.'s Responseto Plaintiffs' Supplemental Motion for Class Certification)filed by Apple Inc.


1101 02/02/2017 Declaration - Other (Unredacted/Sealed Version -Declaration of Alexis Chalklin-Sapsford in Support of AppleInc's Response to Plaintiffs' Supplemental Motion for ClassCertification) filed by Apple Inc.


1102 02/02/2017 Opposition - Other (Unredacted/Sealed Version - DefendantApple Inc.'s Written Objections to the Declaration of Fred M.Schenkelberg in Support of Plaintiffs' Supplemental ClassCertification Brief) filed by Apple Inc.


1103 02/02/2017 Declaration - Other (Unredacted/Sealed Version -Supplemental Declaration of Dr. Lorin M. Hitt in Support ofResponse of Defendant Apple Inc. to Plaintiffs'Supplemental Brief in Support of Motion for ClassCertification) filed by Apple Inc.


1104 02/02/2017 Declaration - Other (Unredacted/Sealed Version -Declaration of Dr. Justin McCrary in Support of Response ofDefendant Apple Inc. to Plaintiffs' Supplemental Brief inSupport of Motion for Class Certification) filed by Apple Inc.


1105 02/02/2017 Declaration - Other (Unredacted/Sealed Version -Declaration of Kelsey M. Larson in Support of DefendantApple Inc.'s Response to Plaintiffs' Supplemental ClassCertification Brief) filed by Apple Inc.


1106 05/11/2017 Notice of Sealed Document (Re: Documents Sealed perCourt Order signed on 05/11/2017 (ROA #816) - Page 1 of3) filed by Apple Inc.






1109 03/30/2017 Opposition - Other (Unredated/Sealed Version - Oppositionof Defendant Apple Inc to Plaintiffs Second SupplementalSubmission in Support of Motion for Class Certification)filed by Apple Inc.


1110 03/30/2017 Declaration - Other (Unredacted/Sealed Version -Supplemental Declaration of Alexis Chalklin-Sapsford inSupport of Apple Inc's Opposition to Plaintffs SecondSupplemental Motion for Class Certification) filed by AppleInc.




1111 03/30/2017 Declaration - Other (Unredacted/Sealed Version -Declaration of Dr. Olivier Toubia in Support of Opposition ofDefendant Apple Inc. to Plaintiffs' Second SupplementalSubmission in Support of Motion for Class Certification)filed by Apple Inc.


1112 03/30/2017 Declaration - Other (Unredacted/Sealed Version -Supplemental Declaration of Dr. Justin McCrary in Supportof Opposition to Defendant Apple Inc to Plaintiffs' SecondSupplemental Submission in Support of Motion for ClassCertification) filed by Apple Inc.


1113 03/30/2017 Declaration - Other (Unredacted/Sealed Version - SecondSupplemental Declaration of Dr. Lorin M. Hitt in Support ofOpposition of Defendant Apple Inc. to Plaintiffs' SecondSupplemental Submission in Support of Motion for ClassCertification) filed by Apple Inc.


1114 03/30/2017 Declaration - Other (Unredacted/Sealed Version -Declaration of Kelsey M. Larson in Support of DefendantApple Inc.'s Opposition to Plaintiffs' Second SupplementalClass Certification Submission) filed by Apple Inc.


1115 03/30/2017 Opposition - Other (Unredacted/Sealed Version - DefendantApple Inc's Written Objections to the Declaration of GregoryPinsonneault in Support of Plaintiffs SupplementalSubmission Regarding Evidence of Aggregate Damages)filed by Apple Inc.


1116 10/28/2019 The OSC - Non-Sanction was rescheduled to 11/01/2019 at02:00:00 PM in C-74 before Ronald L. Styn at Central.

1117 10/28/2019 OSC - Non-Sanction scheduled for 11/01/2019 at 02:00:00PM at Central in C-74 Ronald L. Styn.

1118 10/28/2019 The OSC - Non-Sanction was rescheduled to 12/06/2019 at02:00:00 PM in C-74 before Ronald L. Styn at Central.

1119 10/28/2019 OSC - Non-Sanction scheduled for 12/06/2019 at 02:00:00PM at Central in C-74 Ronald L. Styn.



1122 10/28/2019 Motion for Approval of Class Settlement filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


1123 10/28/2019 Proof of Service (of motion for approval of class settlement)filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


1124 10/25/2019 Motion for Approval of Class Settlement filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


1125 10/25/2019 Memorandum of Points and Authorities (in support ofmotion for approval of class settlement) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


1126 10/25/2019 Declaration - Other (of Deborah S Dixon Esq in support ofmotion for approval of class settlement) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


1127 10/25/2019 Proposed Order (granting preliminary approval of classsettlement) submitted by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk, Darylreceived but not filed on 10/25/2019.


1128 10/25/2019 Proof of Service (of motion, memorandum of points andauthorities, declaration, proposed order) filed by Shamrell,Anthony; Rysdyk, Daryl.


1129 10/31/2019 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.1130 11/01/2019 Declaration - Other filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,



1132 11/01/2019 Matter taken under submission.




1134 11/01/2019 Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (ReginaGarrison - Granted) filed by The Superior Court of SanDiego.

1135 11/05/2019 Miscellaneous Minute Order Finalized.1136 11/06/2019 Matter decided.1137 11/06/2019 Miscellaneous Minute Order Finalized.1138 11/06/2019 Clerk's Certificate of Service By Mail (Minutes Only) SD

generated.1139 11/06/2019 Motion Hearing (Civil) scheduled for 03/20/2020 at 02:00:00

PM at Central in C-74 Ronald L. Styn.1140 11/27/2019 Response (to courts October 18 2019 order to show cause

re motions to seal) filed by Apple Inc.Apple Inc (Defendant)

1141 11/27/2019 Declaration - Other (of E Clay Marquez in support of jointresponse) filed by Apple Inc.


1142 11/27/2019 Proposed Order submitted by Apple Inc received but notfiled on 11/27/2019.


1143 11/27/2019 Proof of Service (of response, declaration, proposed order)filed by Apple Inc.



1145 12/05/2019 Tentative Ruling for Motion Hearing (Civil) published.1146 12/09/2019 Order - Other (Order Granting Preliminary Approval of

Class Settlement, Approving Notice Plan and Setting FinalApproval Hearing) filed by Shamrell, Anthony; Rysdyk,Daryl; Apple Inc.

Shamrell, Anthony (Plaintiff);Rysdyk, Daryl (Plaintiff); AppleInc (Defendant)



EXHIBIT 2

JOHN H. GOMEZ

Mr. Gomez founded Gomez Trial Attorneys in 2005. He acts today as President and Lead Trial

Attorney. Mr. Gomez graduated from the Nation’s top ranked law school, Yale University, in

1993. He clerked for the Hon. Marilyn Huff of the United States District Court, Southern

District. He worked for the international law firm of Latham & Watkins and served the United

States as an Assistant United States Attorney.

Mr. Gomez established himself as one of California’s most recognized and accomplished trial

lawyers. Lawyers USA named him the national Lawyer of the Year in 2010. He has twice been

named San Diego’s Trial Lawyer of the Year. The Consumer Attorneys of San Diego have

awarded him an unprecedented nine separate Outstanding Trial Lawyer Awards. He has been

named a Top 100 California Attorney overall by the Los Angeles Daily Journal, a Top 10 San

Diego attorney overall by San Diego Metropolitan Magazine, and was voted by peers as a top 10

San Diego Super Lawyer in 2012, 2013 and 2014. He was featured as the subject of the cover

story in that 2012 publication.

He was voted by peers as the top attorney in San Diego for 2015 overall in polling conducted by

Super Lawyers rating service. Best Lawyers in America named him the San Diego 2011 and 2012

Plaintiffs Products Liability Attorney of the Year and the 2015 Class Action and Mass Tort

Attorney of the Year. Avvo rates him a 10.0 out of 10.0 and he has been voted by his peers as a

top ten San Diego litigator in three separate fields: Personal Injury, Insurance and Corporate

Litigation. Since 2000, he has recovered over $300 million in settlements and verdicts for his

clients with more than 75 separate recoveries of one million dollars or more. Perhaps most notably,

Mr. Gomez has obtained 4 separate jury verdicts of one million dollars or more in which the

defendant offered absolutely nothing to settle prior to trial. Mr. Gomez also serves in leadership

roles relating to numerous coordinated litigations involving defective drugs and medical devices.

Mr. Gomez is a proud member of the American Board of Trial Advocates.

Mr. Gomez is also a member of the Summit Council, a national group of our country’s finest trial

lawyers for plaintiffs. Members are nationally recognized by their peers as top civil justice

advocates. All members have obtained at least one ten million dollar jury verdict and at least three

jury verdicts in excess of one million dollars as lead counsel in jury trials, have served as the

President or Chair of a state or national civil justice association, or have served as Chair of a

plaintiff’s steering committee for a major mass tort or class action litigation. Membership is

limited to less than thirty lawyers nationally and is by invitation only. Summit Council members

work collaboratively to ensure the very highest level of representation to each of their clients.

Mr. Gomez’s clients benefit from access to this highly exclusive and talented group.

Professional Awards & Recognitions: Consumer Attorneys of San Diego “Trial Lawyer of the Year”

2006 and 2010; Consumer Attorneys of San Diego “Outstanding Trial Lawyer” (12 time recipient); Super

Lawyer 2008-2019 (Top 10 San Diego Super Lawyer 2012-14; 2018); Best Lawyers In America 2007-

2013; Best Lawyers in America San Diego Plaintiffs Products Liability Attorney of the Year, 2011-2012

Best Lawyers in America 2015 Class Action and Mass Tort Attorney of the Year; San Diego Daily

Transcript “Top 10” San Diego Attorney (Peer Review Polling) 2005-2015; Lawyers USA National

“Lawyer of the Year”; American Board of Trial Advocates, Associate; Summit Council, Member

(invitation only to less than thirty lawyers nationally); San Diego County Bar Association “Community

Service Award” Recipient, 2012; Martindale Hubbell AV-rated.

Professional Service: Consumer Attorneys of California, 2013 Executive Board; Consumer

Attorneys of San Diego, 2012 President; Chicano Federation, Board Member; La Cuna,

(nonprofit dedicated to placing Latino foster children), former Board Chair; San Diego County

Bar Association, former Board Member; San Diego Volunteer Lawyers Program, former Board

Member; and National Institute of Trial Advocacy, Faculty Member

DEBORAH S. DIXON

Deborah Dixon is Of Counsel at Gomez Trial Attorneys. She manages the class action practice,

focusing on products liability and consumer claims. She also litigates complex, multi-party claims,

including wage and gender discrimination claims. She remains active in trials, as well as complex

litigation, including co-trying two multi-week class action jury trials.

Prior to joining Gomez Trial Attorneys, Ms. Dixon had significant litigation with complex matters

as a partner with Wingert Grebing Brubaker & Juskie, where she also had clerked during law

school and litigated cases for 8 years. During her tenure with Wingert Grebing Ms. Dixon litigated

hundreds of complex cases and completed several trials and arbitrations.

Ms. Dixon is recognized as a Super Lawyer by Super Lawyers magazine from 2017 through 2019

and was previously recognized as a Super Lawyers “Rising Star” from 2014 through 2016.

Deborah was named by San Diego Metro Magazine as one of the best and brightest in San Diego

in its “40 Under 40” designation; as “Best of the Bar” by The San Diego Business Journal from

2014- 2016 and recognized by the San Diego Daily Transcript as a Top Attorney and the 2012

Top Young Attorney, as well as a 2012 Woman of Influence. Recently she was also selected “Top

40 under 40” by The National Trial Lawyers.

Ms. Dixon is a past-president of Lawyers Club of San Diego (2015-2016), the largest professional

bar association in San Diego. Prior to serving as president, Ms. Dixon served as a Director on

Lawyers Club’s Board of Directors for three years. She then served Lawyers Club as the co-chair

of its non-profit, Fund for Justice from 2016-2018 and remains on Lawyers Club’s Advisory Board.

In 2016, Ms. Dixon was selected for a three-year term to serve as a Lawyer Representative to the

United States District Court, Southern District, acting as a liaison between the federal bar and bench

and coordinating seminars for the judiciary and participating in the Ninth Circuit Judicial

Conference.

Ms. Dixon graduated from California Western School of Law in 2007, and has remained active,

serving as a past-president of the Alumni Association Board of Directors; an adjunct professor of

the Distinguished Advocates Trial Skills Class and Alternative Dispute Resolution and as a coach

for the mock trial teams

Relevant Case Experience

Class Counsel, Marcy Krinsk, et al. v. Monster Beverage Corporation, et al., San Diego

Superior Court Case No. 37-2014-00020192-CU-BT-CTL before Hon. Joel R. Wohlfeil

Class trial counsel completing over three-week class action jury trial Allen v. Hyland’s,

Inc., United States District Court, Central District, Western Division Case No. 12-cv-1150- DMG-

MAN before Hon. Dolly M. Gee;

Class trial counsel completing a multi-week class action jury trial, Union Square at

Broadway Homeowners Association v. Western Pacific Housing-Broadway, et al., San Diego

Superior Court Case No. 37-2011-0091935-CU-CD-CTL before Hon. Ronald L. Styn;

Class Counsel, In re Sony Vaio Computer Notebook Trackpad Litigation, United States District Court, Southern District of California, Case No. 09-cv-02109-BAS-MDD, Hon. Cynthia A. Bashant;

Class Counsel, Allen v. Similasan Corporation, et al. United States District Court, Southern

District of California Case No. 3:12-cv-00376-BAS-JLB, Hon. Cynthia A. Bashant;

Lead Counsel in Saylor v. Toyota, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. CCP 4621,

Hon. Amy D. Hogue;

Lead Trial Counsel in In re: DePuy ASR Hip System Cases, Los Angeles Superior Court

JCCP Proceeding No. 4649, Hon. Mary E. Wiss;

Lead Trial Counsel in In re Cold Therapy Cases, San Diego Superior Court Case No.

JCCP 4680, Hon. Joel M. Pressman;

Plaintiffs Steering Committee In re: Invokana (Canagliflozin) Products Liability

Litigation, MDL No. 2750, United States District Court, District of New Jersey, Hon. Brian R. Martinotti;

Plaintiffs Executive Committee In re: Fresenius Granuflo/Naturalyte Dialysate Products

Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2428, United States District Court, District of Massachusetts, Hon. Douglas P. Woodlock, J.;

Plaintiffs Executive Committee and Coordinating Firm In re JCCP 4771, Zoloft Birth

Defect Cases, Orange County Superior Court JCCP No. 4771, Hon. Kim G. Dunning;

Plaintiffs Executive Committee and Coordinating Firm In re JCCP 4786, Paxil Birth

Defect Cases II, Los Angeles Superior Court JCCP No. 4786, Hon. Amy D. Hogue;

Lead Counsel for 111 Consolidated Cases In re Chariot Wildfire Litigation, United States

District Court, Southern District of California, Case No. 14-cv-01437-AJB-KSC, before Hon.

Anthony J. Battaglia;

Leadership In re Biomet M2A Magnum Hip Implant Products Liability Litigation, United

States District Court Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division, MDL 2391 before Hon. Robert L. Miller; and

Leadership Fitbit JCCP 4880, San Diego Superior Court before Hon. Eddie C. Sturgeon

Lead Trial Counsel, Emanuel Richard Giglio v. Monsanto Company, United States District

Court, Northern District of California, Case No. 3:16-cv-05658-VC before Hon. Vince Chhabria

Lead Trial Counsel, Burrell Lamb, et al. v. Monsanto Company, Circuit Court of the County

of St. Louis, State of Missouri, Case No. 18SL-CC03681 before Hon. Michael T. Jamison

EXHIBIT 3

GEORGETOWN LAW Center for the Study of the Legal Profession PEER MONITOR ~

Report on the State of the Legal Market

The Center for the Study of the Legal Profession at the Georgetown University Law Center and Thomson Reuters Peer Monitor are pleased

to present this 2014 Reporl setting out our views of the dominant trends

impacting the legal market in 2013 and key issues likely to influence the market in 2014 and beyond. 1

Introduction - Is Bigger Always Better?

There is a famous scene in the 1975 award-winning Steven Spielberg movie Jaws, when the Amity Police Chief Martin Brody (played by Roy Scheider) first catches a glimpse of the 25-foot long great white shark that has been terrorizing his community and that he is then chasing in a small fishing boat. Stunned by what he has seen, Brody backs into the cabin of the boat and grimly remarks to Quint, the seasoned shark hunter, "You're gonna need a bigger boat."

In an admittedly different context, one could argue that this same advice has been the most prominent driver of law firm strategies over the past decade or so. In large measure, most law firm leaders -- both before and since the Great Recession -- have appeared fixated on building "a bigger boat" as the keystone of their vision for moving their firms forward. Driven by a desire to achieve perceived economies of scale, to better serve client needs, to mirror the actions of competitors, or to improve their rankings in industry statistics, law firms have pursued aggressive growth strategies -- before 2008, through ever increasing hiring quotas and, since 2008, primarily through lateral hiring and mergers.2

The past year saw an overall continuation of this trend, although some firms have begun to retrench. According to The National Law Journal, the 350 largest U.S. law firms grew by only 1.1 percent during 2012, as compared to 1. 7 percent growth in 2011. And, interestingly, some 140 firms on the NLJ 350 list (or about 40 percent of the group) actually shrank in size as compared to the prior year.3 At the same time, 2013 was a record year for law firm mergers, and lateral acquisitions continued apace.

By early December, the number of reported mergers involving U.S. law firms (91) had already surpassed the previous record (70) set in 2008, and it was widely expected that the year-end total would be even higher.4

1 The Center for the Study of the Legal Profession and Thomson Reuters Peer Monitor gratefully acknowledge the

participation of the following persons in the preparation of this Report: from the Center for the Study of the Legal Profession - James W. Jones, Senior Fellow (lead author) and Milton C. Regan, Jr., Professor of Law and Co-Direc

tor; and from Thomson Reuters Peer Monitor - Mark Medice, Senior Director and Jennifer Roberts, Data Analyst.

2 The dramatic growth in the size of law firms has been a major feature of the legal market for the past 50 years. In

2012, The National Law Journal's NLJ 350 list showed that the 350th largest law firm in the U.S. had 112 lawyers.

That compared starkly to 1965, when the largest law firm in the U.S. had only 125 lawyers.

3 "The NLJ 350," The National Law Journal, July 6, 2013.

4 "Big Firm Tie-Ups Abroad Keep 2013 Merger Mania Alive," The AmLaw Daily, Dec. 12, 2013. The article also

describes high levels of merger activity in the United Kingdom, Canada, and South Africa.

While year-end figures on lateral moves among U.S. law firms are not yet available, it is expected that they will reflect a continuation of the high level of lateral partner activity that we have seen in the market in recent years.5 In addition, in a recent survey of leaders of Am law 200 firms, The American Lawyer found that a whopping 80 percent of respondents expected to make lateral partner hires in litigation related practice areas during 2014.6

Against this background, this report will examine the continuing dominant role that growth appears to play in the strategic thinking of most U.S. law firms. We will ask whether building "a bigger boat" is always the right strategy for firms and will consider some of the challenges that growth - particular1y rapid growth -- poses for law firm leaders. Finally, we will suggest other areas of focus that we believe may be far more relevant to the success of law firms in the future. The starting place for our inquiry, however, must be a look at the state of today's legal market and the ways in which competition in the market has changed fundamentally since 2008.

Current State of the Legal Market By the Numbers

By most indicators, 2013 was another flat year for economic growth in U.S. law firms, with continuing sluggish demand growth, persistent challenges of low productivity, ongoing client pushback on rate increases, and a continuing struggle to maintain discipline on expenses. Although the performance of individual firms obviously differed, with some performing well above market averages, on the whole the financial performance of the U.S. legal market remained fairly lackluster during the year.

Demand Growth

Demand for legal services in 2013 declined slightly across the industry, as tracked in the Thomson Reuters Peer Monitor data base.7 As shown in Chart 1 below {which tracks performance on a year-to-date basis through November), after a sharp decline in the first quarter,6 demand growth recovered somewhat ending at a slightly negative level of -1.1 percent for the 12-month period measured. While a clear improvement over the collapse in demand growth seen in 2009 {when growth hit a negative 5.1 percent level), the current demand growth rate has been essentially flat to somewhat negative for the past three years.

5 In February 2013, in its annual Lateral Report, The American Lawyer noted that lateral partner moves among Am Law 200 firms jumped 9.7 percent over the prior year for the 12-month period ending September 30, 2012, and 33.6 percent over a similar period in 2010. Even taking into account the fact that 280 of the 2,691 lateral partner moves in 2012 were attributable to the failure of a single firm (Dewey & LeBoeuf), the increased level of activity was noteworthy. "The 2013 Lateral Report," The American Lawyer, Mar. 1, 2013.

6 Richard Uoyd, "Firm Leaders Survey: Slow Growth on Tap for 2014," The American Lawyer, Dec. 2, 2013. 7 Thomson Reuters Peer Monitor data ("Peer Monitor data") are based on reported results from 130 law firms, including 53

AmLaw 100 firms, 38 AmLaw 2nd 100 firms, and 39 additional firms. For present purposes, "demand for legal services" is viewed as equivalent to total billable hours recorded by firms included in a particular data base.

8 It is worth noting that the sharp decline in demand growth during the first quarter of 2013 followed an upswing in demand in the fourth quarter of 2012, an increase at least partly attributable to the desire of many clients to dose various corporate transactions in advance of new tax rules that took effect on January 1, 2013.

2

l '1! 'rO ct'. .;::

~ 2

(.'.)

Chart 1 - Growth in Demand for Legal Services

6 Y/Y % Change

3

0

I -3 -i

-6 } 2005-2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 CAGR (Nov YTD)

Source Thomson Reuters Peer Monitor

As shown in Chart 2 below, among various practice areas, when measured on a 2013 year-to-date comparative basis, real estate showed the highest demand growtb, albeit at a modest 1.2 percent level, followed by labor and employment at 0.4 percent. Corporate practices were essentially flat, and all other practices saw declines.

Chart 2 - Demand Growth by Practices

3 Y/Y % Change

0 -1---

I -6

-9 Real Labor/ Corporate

Estate Emp loyment (all) Tax IP- Litigation Bankruptcy

Litigation

( • YTD Nov: '13 v '12 l Source Thomson Reuters Peer Monilor

Productivity

During 2013, the number of lawyers in U.S. firms grew by about 1 percent. Given the

slight decline in overall demand growth, it is not surprising, therefore, that productivity

- defined as the total number of billable hours recorded by a firm divided by the total

number of lawyers in the firm -- remained essentially flat.

3

As can be seen in Chart 3 below, this continues a trend that we have seen for the last several years.9 What remains significant, however, is that current levels of productivity are still over 100 billable hours per timekeeper per year lower than in the pre-recession period in 2007.

Moreover, 2013 saw a continuation of the familiar pattern of associate billable hours exceeding those of equity partners by some 100-120 hours per year, and equity partner billable hours exceeding those of other categories of lawyers (including non-equity partners, of counsel, senior counsel , special counsel, etc.) by some 300 hours per year. All of this as shown in Chart 3 evidences an ongoing problem of under productivity in the latter categories of lawyers.

Chart 3 - Productivity (Hours per Lawyer) by Category

100 ' Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 IQ' 02 Ql Ql~' Q3 Q4To1 Q2 Q3 Q~ lll Q2 Q3 04 01 02 03 Q4 IQ1 Q2 Q3 04(01 02 Q3 Q4\Q1 Q2 Oct+Nov

I ·as '06 1·01 l·as l·ag ·10 l·u h2 '13

- Equity Partners - Associates - Other Lawyers - Composite

Source Thamson Reuter~ ;:iaor ,\1pn•tor Lawyers Only

Rates and Realization

As has been the case since the beginning of the Great Recession in 2008, firms continued to raise their rates during 2013, albeit at a fairly modest level of 3.5 percent (well below the 6-8 percent annual increases typical in the pre-2008 period). And, as has also been the case for the past five years, clients continued to push back on rate increases, keeping pressure on the realization rates that firms were able to achieve.

Chart 4 below shows the rate progression as tracked in the Peer Monitor data base from the third quarter of 2010 through November 2013. As can be seen, over this three-year period , firms increased their standard rates by 11 percent from an average of $429 per hour to $476 (or an average increase of about 3.7 percent per year). At the same time, however, the collected rates actually achieved by firms increased by only 8.8 percent from an average of $363 per hour to $395 (or an average increase of 2.9 percent).

9 There was an uplick in productivity during October 2013, but - based on data from prior years - this appears to be a fairty typical seasonal anomaly with October hours generally being counterbalanced by lower billable hours for the remainder of the fourth quarter.

4

2J '" o=

'" :;J'

'" >

""

Chart 4 - Rate Progression

$500 .

$475 .I

$450 -i

__/* $425 _,

/ $400 ~

/ /~------""""" _,.,,.-----------"- ~

_,-------------~

-,,,,,,.,,..

~-------------~- ~------------~-____ ,,,,,,...-r -

----________ ,....--________ ..... ____ ,,,,. $375 1 $350 _/ Ir-----

;03 04

'10

(

[; r.1301 ! 01 02 03 04 02 03 Q4 Q2 Q3 Nov

i111 YTD

2

r - Standard - Worked - Billed - Collected

Source Thomson Rellters Peer \~onilor-

These results, which reflect continuing client resistance to firm rate hikes, are also reflected in firm realization rates over the same period. As can be seen in Chart 5 below, over the three-year period from the third quarter of 2010 through the third quarter of 2013, realization rates - i.e., the percentages of work perfonned at a finn's standard rates that are actually billed to and collected from clients - have continued to decline. Billing realization dropped from 89.12 percent to 86.74 percent, while collected realization dropped from 85.32 percent to 83.49 percent (a rate that is slightly lower than the record low rate of 83.6 percent seen in 2012). What this means, of course, is that - on average - law finns are collecting only 83.5 cents for every $1.00 of standard time they record. To understand the full impact, one need only consider that at the end of 2007, the collected realization rate was at the 92 percent level.

Chart 5 - Billed and Collected Rates against Standard

90%

89%

88% -

87% -

86%

85% - ~.._ ____ ......, 84%

83%

Q2 Q3 Q4 [ 1201

Q2 03 Q4 Ql Q2 Q3 Nov YTD

i'13

( -Billing - Collectrons l Source. Tbornson Reute~s Peer t.fon:ter

5

Expenses

One of the challenges of managing in a slow growth economy is keeping a tight rein on

expenses - both direct and indirect.10 Prior to the onset of the economic downturn in

2008, by any rational measure expenses in law firms were largely out of control. In the

fourth quarter of 2007, for example, direct expenses of U.S. law firms (measured on a

rolling 12-month year-over-year percentage change basis) were growing at an average

annual rate of 18 percent, while indirect expenses were growing at 10.9 percent. With

the beginning of the recession in 2008, almost all firms slashed expenses across the

board, hitting negative growth rates in the second quarter of 2010 of -8.2 percent for di

rect expenses and -2.9 percent for indirect. Those reduced levels of spending - induced

primarily by panicked reactions to the economic crisis -- were not sustainable over the

long term, and expenses began to rise again toward the end of 2010. Since that time, as

shown in Chart 6 below, although expense growth has increased - in 2013 up to 2.1

percent for both direct and indirect expenses -- firms have done a reasonably good job of managing their expenses effectively.

Chart 6 - Expense Growth

20% ' Rolling 12-Month Y/Y% Change

15% -1

10%

5%

0 -+---

-5%-!

-10% ~ ~ T

Q4 F Q2 Q3 Q~ ~, Q4(Q1

(

Ql Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4rl Q2 Q3 Q2 Q3 Q2 Q3 Q4 IQ1 Q2 Q3

'07 l·os '09 1'10 '11 h2 '13

( - Direct - Overhead

Source: Thomson Reuters Peer Ma11ilo1

Profits per Partner

The continuing combination of sluggish demand growth, constrained productivity, and

low realization rates have combined to keep profits per partner ("PPP") relatively flat over

the past three years. As shown on Chart 7 below, while PPP in 201311 was up slightly for

all categories affirms across the market, the increase over 2012 was quite modest and,

at least in the case of AmLaw 100 and mid-sized firms, lower than levels in 2011.12

10 Direct expenses refer to those expenses related to fee earners (primarily the compensation and benefits costs oflawyers and other timekeepers). Indirect expenses refer to all other expenses of lhe firm (including occupancy costs, technology, administrative staff, etc.).

11 The PPP shown on Chart 7 for 2013 is based on YTD October numbers. 12 It should be noted that Peer Monitor includes in its "profits per partner'' number a// lawyers listed by firms as "partners"

(whether equity or non~quily or income). This approach facilitates easier comparisons between firms than a "profits per equity partner'' measure and eliminates questions about how firms define "equity partners."

6

Chart 7 - Profits per Partner

$600,000

$550,000

$500,000

$450,000

$400,000 -

$350,000

$300,000 r All Segments Am Law 100

( • 2011 • 2012

Source. Thomson Reute1s Peer Momlar

Am Law Second 100

• 2013

Changed Basis of Competition in the Legal Market

Mid Size

The current trends described above reflect fundamental changes in the nature of competition in the legal market, changes that have been increasingly evident since 2008. Although many factors have contributed to these changes, some of them unrelated to the economic downturn, 13 the onset of the Great Recession accelerated (and, to some extent, exacerbated) the pace of change across the market.

The first and perhaps most obvious change is that the legal market has become much more intensely competitive than it was five years ago. This is hardly surprising since, for the past five years, the supply of legal services has significantly exceeded demand, as reflected in the ongoing struggle of firms to maintain prior levels of productivity. In a market in which supply exceeds demand, the only way in which one supplier can expand its market share is by taking business from others, with a resulting increase in overall competition. And that is precisely what has happened in the legal market since 2008.

A second and perhaps more lasting change is that the market for legal services has shifted from a sellers' to a buyers' market, a shift that has serious long-term implications for the leaders of all law firms. Prior to 2008, the fundamental decisions about how legal services were delivered -- the myriad decisions about how matters were organized, scheduled, and staffed; how strategies and tactics were implemented; and how lawyers charged for their services -- were all essentially made by law firms and not by their clients. This is not to suggest that clients were not consulted or that, from time to time, clients didn't push back, but by and large all of the key decisions relating to a representation were made by outside lawyers.

13 These unrelated changes include factors like the growing availability of public information about the legal market, the inexorable drive toward commoditization of legal services enhanced by the growth of enabling technologies, the emergence of non-traditional service providers, the changing role of in-house corporate counsel, the impact of globalization, and the collapse of an unsustainable law firm business and economic model based largely on the ability to raise rates 6-8 percent a year.

7

All of that changed beginning in 2008, when clients - driven to a large extent by an economic imperative to bring down the overall costs of legal services - took control of all of

these key decisions. That shift, combined with the dynamic of a market in which supply

exceeds demand (as described above), placed clients in control of the relationships with their outside law firms in ways never before seen in the legal market. And clients have

not been reluctant to exercise their new leverage.

Over the past five years, clients have talked increasingly about enhancing the "value"

they receive for the legal services they purchase, 14 and it has become increasingly clear that what they mean by "value" is efficiency, predictability, and cost effectiveness in the delivery of legal services, quality being assumed.15 This has led many corporate

law departments to retain more work in-house thereby reducing their reliance on outside counsel. Indeed, the 2013 Altman Weil Chief Legal Officer Survey16 found that,

among the 207 CLO respondents, 44 percent indicated that they had shifted work to in-house lawyers during the previous 12 months, and 30.5 percent said that they had reduced the total amount of work sent to outside counsel.17 Moreover, some 29 per

cent of respondents indicated that they intended to decrease their overall use of outside counsel in the next 12 months, and only 15 percent said they expected to increase such use.18 Consistent with these responses, 47 percent of CLOs indicated that they had decreased their budgets for outside counsel during 2013 (a figure that compares

to 39 percent in 2012 and 25.4 percent in 2011 ).19

Interestingly, the same client focus on enhanced value in the delivery of legal services

may now be evident in a subtle but potentially important shift in the allocation of business within the legal market. In a recent survey conducted by AdvanceLaw, 20 general counsel

at 88 major companies were asked about their willingness to move high stakes (though not necessarily "bet the company") work away from "pedigreed firms" (essentially de

fined as AmLaw 20 or Magic Circle firms) to non-pedigreed firms, assuming a 30 percent difference in overall cost. 21 Of the respondents, 7 4 percent indicated they would be in

clined to use the less pedigreed firm, with only 13 percent saying they would not.22 In a related question, respondents were asked whether, based on their own experiences,

lawyers at the most pedigreed firms were more or less responsive than their counterparts at other firms. Some 57 percent of respondents said that they found lawyers at

pedigreed firms less responsive, while only 11 percent said they found them more.23

Similar results were reflected in the Altman Weil CLO Survey, where 40.5 percent of respondents indicated that they had shifted work to lower priced outside law firms in the preceding 12 months.24

14 This concept was embodied in the "Value Challenge" program launched by the Association of Corporate Counsel in 2008. See www.acc.com/valuechallenge/.

15 Obviously, corporate general counsel are concerned about the quality of legal advice they receive. Increasingly, however, quality is viewed as the "table stakes" necessary to play in the game to begin with and not a factor for deciding which ftrm should be awarded a particular piece of work Stated differendy, offering high quality legal advice is essential to getting on a general counsel's list to begin with, but once on the list, it is likely that wori< will be awarded on the basis of which firm the general counsel believes can deliver the services most efliciendy, predictably, and cost effectively.

16 Alman Weil, Inc., 2013 Chief Legal Officer Survey: An Altman Weil Flash Survey, Nov. 2013 ("Altman Weil CLO Survey").

17 Id. atp. 10. 18 Id. atp. 4. 19 Id. atp. 17. 20 Advancelaw is an organization that vets law firms for quality, efficiency, and dient service and shares performance informa

tion with its membership of some 90 general counsel of major global companies, induding the likes of Google, Panasonic, Nike, eBay, Orade, Deutsche Bank, Kellogg, Yahoo, 3M, ConAgra, Nestle, and Unilever. See http://www.advancelaw.com.

21 The current cost premium far an Amlaw 20 firm relative ta an Amlaw 150 or 200 firm is typically far mare than 30 percent. As of November 2013, based on Peer Monitor data, the spread between the average standard and wori<ed rates of AmLaw 100 firms and those of AmLaw 2nd 100 firms averaged 22 percent. And, of course, the average for allAmlaw 100 firms is significantly lower than for AmLaw 20 firms alone.

22 The survey question and results are set out at http://hbrblogs.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/badnews-biglaw_5BOr2.gif. 23 Id.

24 Altman Weil CLO Survey, at p. 10. 8

What these results suggest is that brand value - in this case the brand value of the largest and historically most prestigious firms in the legal market -- may be losing some of its luster as increasingly savvy general counsel select outside law firms based on considerations of price and efficiency and not on reputation alone. Further tantalizing evidence for this conclusion is provided in the 2013 Counsellink Enterprise Legal Management Trends Report released in October.25 That report compared the billings of the "Largest 50" U.S. law firms (i.e., firms with more than 750 lawyers) with those of firms in the 200 to 500 lawyer range, the latter being defined as "Large Enough" firms.26 The report found that three years ago, "Large Enough" firms accounted for 18 percent of all of the billings in the Counsel link data base, while the "Largest 50" firms accounted for 26 percent. In 2013, the share of "Large Enough" firms had risen to 22 percent, while the share of the "Largest 50" firms had declined to 20 percent. 27

Looking at high fee work, the Counsellink Trends Report found a similar pattern, at least in respect of high fee litigation matters. Based on the past three years of billing history for litigation matters with total billings of at least $1 million, the report found that "Large Enough" firms nearly doubled the portion of such work they received, growing their share from 22 percent in 2010 to 41 percent in 2013. 28

Challenges of Growth as a Strategy

Against this background, we can return to our initial question -- whether the dominant role played by growth in the strategic thinking of most law firms continues to make sense given the significant changes that have occurred in the legal market? The most common justifications given for a focus on growth include (i) the desire to achieve "economies of scale", (ii) the necessity of creating an "ever expanding pie" to provide opportunities for younger lawyers and especially younger partners, (iii) the need to diversify to protect a firm against cyclical downturns in specific practices, and (iv) the requirements for a larger market footprint to better serve the needs of clients. While there is some validity to all of these arguments, they must be balanced against the potential problems created by growth - particularly rapid growth.

As to the desire to achieve economies of scale, it must be noted at the outset that this is a pecuiliar strategic objective for an industry that continues to be largely reliant on an hourly-billing model. Economies of scale, as an economic concept, are focused on the creation of efficiencies that allow producers to lower costs and thereby create a competitive advantage. In the context of the legal industry, however, adding more lawyers (all of whom bill at ever increasing hourly rates) is the antithesis of what economies of scale are supposed to produce. Even if we assume, however, that economies of scale may be important in the legal industry, there are limits on the benefits that can be derived from growth.

25 Counsellink, "Enterprise Legal Management Trends Report-2013 Mid-Year Edition: The Rise of'Large Enough' Law Firms," Oct 2013 ("Counsellink Trends Report"). This report uses data available through the Counsel Link Enterprise Legal Management platform, an a-billing system. Currently, the data base indudes 2 million invoices representing more than $10 billion in legal spend and well over 300,000 matters over the past four years.

26 The report explains that the term "Large Enough" is applied to these firms "because firms of this size generally have fullservice capabilities across a broad array of practice areas and have the capacity to appropriately staff and handle complex and also high-volume, repetitive legal matters." Counsellink Trends Report, p.4.

27 Id. at p. 5. These figures, and others induded in the Counsellink Trends Report, are based on rolling 12-month totals end-ing on June 30 of each relevant year.

28 Id. at p. 6. 9

Observers of the legal market have commented for some time that the benefits of

scale seem to diminish once a law firm exceeds 100 lawyers or so, and that is particu

larly true if the law firm has multiple offices.29 Moreover, a comparison of the number

of lawyers in AmLaw 200 firms and the profits per partner of such firms shows that there is very low correlation between firm size and profitability. 30 This conclusion was

recently confirmed by an analysis of Peer Monitor data for some 132 firms reporting their financial results for 2012. These results showed a very weak relationship be

tween profits per partner and firm size, as well as overall margin (i.e., profit as a percentage of revenue) and firm size. Indeed, firm size had a negative relationship with

reported margin figures. Similarly, a regression analysis using 2013 Peer Monitor data from 130 firms showed a very low correlation between firm size and office count with reported expenses per lawyer or with expenses as a percentage of overall firm rev

enue. 31 Additionally, whatever the potential benefits of economies of scale, the size needed for a firm to achieve such benefits has undoubtedly been lowered in recent years as a result of substantial improvements in technology which have allowed smaller firms to "punch above their weight." 32

From a strategic point of view, however, the real problem with growth in this context

is not just that economies of scale tend to diminish above a certain size. It is rather that, once a firm achieves a certain size, diseconomies of scale can actually set in.

Large firms with multiple offices -- particularly ones in multiple countries -- are much more difficult to manage than smaller firms. They require a much higher investment of resources to achieve uniformity in quality and service delivery and to meet the ex

pectations of clients (described above) for efficiency, predictability, and cost effectiveness. They also face unique challenges in maintaining collegial and collaborative

cultures, particularly in the face of rapid growth resulting from mergers or large-scale lateral acquisitions. In other words, pursuing growth for the purpose of achieving economies of scale can be a mixed blessing.

A similar analysis can be applied to the use of growth as a primary means of creating

opportunities for younger partners. While it is true that larger firms may have broader reputations and better name recognition, factors that could be helpful to

younger partners in seeking to develop or expand client relationships, it is also true (as described above) that the importance of "brand" as a factor that is considered by

clients in selecting outside counsel has diminished in recent years.

29 In 2003. Ward Bower of Altman Weil noted:

For over 30 years, ... [survey data] has sho'M'I, generally, that there are no economies of scale in private law practice. Larger firms almost always spend more per lawyer on staffing, occupancy, equipment, promotion, malpractice and other non-personnel insurance coverages, office supplies and other expenses than do smaller firms. This is counterintuitive, in the sense that larger firms should be able to spread fixed costs across a larger number of lawyers, reducing per lawyer costs, overall. However, that principle does not take into account the excess plant and equipment capacity necessary to support growth, or the increases in staff and communications costs as firms become larger.

Ward Bower, "Mining the Surveys: DISeconomies of Scale?" Altman Weil, Inc. report, 2003.

30 Ed Wesemann, "What Is the Optimum Size for a Law Firm?" http://edweseman.com/artides/profitability/2011 /03/16/what-is-the-optimum-size-for-~aw-firm/. Wesemann notes that profitability does appear to correlate with two other factors, both related to location. First, firms headquartered or having their largest office in New Yori<, Chicago, Washington, Los Angeles, or San Francisco are generally more profitable than similar firms in other cities. And, firms with more than one office are generally less profitable than firms of the same size having only one office, at least until Orms exceed 200 lawyers or so in size.

31 Based on analysis by Peer Monitor staff. 32 See Ian Wimbush, "Economies of Scale Needed to Set Up a Firm Have Actually Fallen," The Law Society Gazette,

Sept, 24, 2013. Wimbush notes that "[b]arriers to entry to the legal marlcet have been lowered in recent years, largely due to advances in technology, for example using Cloud-based IT systems."

10

It would seem that, to maximize new business opportunities for younger partners and others, it would be wiser for firms to focus their energies less on growth and more on the issues that clients care about - responsiveness, efficiency, cost effectiveness, and the like. We will have more to say about that below.

As to the need for firms to diversify their practices, there is obviously wisdom in the notion of attempting to diversify risk by having enough practices to weather a temporary downturn in one or two. That fact, however, does not mean that firms will be successful in moving into areas that are outside their traditional markets or areas of competence -- at least not in the short term. Moreover, given the increased willingness of firms in recent years to weed out "underperforming" partners and practices, the use of risk diversification as a rationale for growth rings somewhat hollow.

Finally, as to the concern about needing a larger market footprint to serve client needs, this can certainly be a legitimate strategic issue for some firms. A firm focused on high-end capital market transactions might well need offices in key capital market centers around the world. An IP firm serving the high tech and biotech industries might see value in offices in Silicon Valley, Route 128, the Dulles corridor, Research Triangle Park, and Austin. A labor and employment law boutique might well justify offices in key major employment centers around the country. Or an energy focused firm might need offices in Houston, Calgary, the Middle East, and Central Asia. But while it may be important for firms in particular markets to have sufficient size to handle large, complex, high-volume matters for clients, even this imperative has its limits. As previously noted, in the Counsellink Trends Report, firms having 200 to 500 lawyers were regarded as "large enough" for these purposes.33

The real point is that a particular firm's decision to grow should be made in the context of a clear strategic vision of a market segment that the firm can realistically expect to serve. There is nothing wrong with growth per se, and indeed organic, demand-led growth resulting from a firm's successful expansion of client relationships can be very healthy. But growth for growth's sake is not a viable strategy in today's legal market. The notion that clients will come if only a firm builds a large enough platform or that, despite obvious trends toward the disaggregation of legal services, clients will somehow be attracted to a "one-stop shopping" solution is not likely a formula for success. Strategy should drive growth and not the other way around. In our view, much of the growth that has characterized the legal market in recent years fails to conform to this simple rule and frankly masks a bigger problem -- the continuing failure of most firms to focus on strategic issues that are more important for their long-term success than the number of lawyers or offices they may have.

Changing Strategic Focus

To address the concerns of clients for more efficient, predictable, and cost effective legal services, law firms must focus their attention on re-thinking the basic organizational, pricing, and service delivery models that have dominated the market for the past several decades. While some firms have engaged in such reviews and launched innovative new models to better compete in the current market environment, most have not.

33 See note 26 supra. 11

In its 2013 Law Firms in Transition Survey report,34 Altman Weil describes the responses

of some 238 managing partners and chairs of U.S. law firms with 50 or more lawyers to a

number of questions about their firms' willingness to change their basic operational mod

els. Interestingly, the law firm leaders surveyed clearly understand that the legal market

has changed in fundamental ways, with substantial majorities agreeing that permanent changes in the market include more price competition (95.6 percent), focus on improved

practice efficiency (95.6 percent), more commoditized legal work (89.7 percent), more

non-hourly billing (79.5 percent), and more competition from non-traditional service

providers (78.6 percent).35 And 66.7 percent of respondents indicated that they believe

the pace of change in the legal market will increase going forward.36 And yet, only a mi

nority of firms has undertaken any significant changes to their basic business models.

More specifically, 44.6 percent of those surveyed indicated that their firms had taken

some steps to improve the efficiency of their legal service delivery,37 mostly in the form

of changing project staffing models to include part-time and contract lawyers and out

sourcing some (primarily non-lawyer) functions. 38 Some 45 percent reported that their

firms had made significant changes in their strategic approach to partnership admis

sion and retention, primarily in the form of tightening standards or practices for admis

sion to the equity partner ranks. 39 And 29 percent of firm leaders indicated that their

firms had changed their strategic approaches to pricing since 2008.40

When asked to rank their overall confidence level (on a 0 to 10 scale) in their firms' ability to

keep pace with the challenges in the new legal marketplace, the law firm leaders participat

ing in the survey produced a median rating of7 (in the "moderate" range), with only 12.9

percent indicating a "high" level of confidence.41 When asked, however, to rate their part

ners' level of adaptability to change (again on a 0 to 10 scale), the median rating dropped to

5 (in the "low" range), with only 2.2 percent indicating a "high" level of adaptability.42

The law firm leaders participating in the survey were also asked how serious they be

lieve law firms are about changing their legal service delivery model to provide greater

value to clients (as opposed to just reducing rates). Again using a 0 to 10 scale, re

spondents produced a median rating of 5 (in the "low" range).43 That compared to a

median rating of 3 given by corporate chief legal officers when asked the same ques

tion in October 2012.44

The lack of commitment to genuine change reflected in these results seemed con

firmed by responses to another question posed to survey participants. Asked to list

the greatest challenges their firms face in the next 24 months, the top four answers

from respondents (which constituted just over 50 percent of all responses) were all in

ternally focused issues aimed at protecting the status quo of the law firm and not at

becoming more responsive to clients.45

34 Thomas S. Clay, 2013 Law Firms In Transition: An Altman Weil Flash Survey, Altman Weil, Inc., May 2013 ("Altman Weil Report").

35 Id. at p. 1. 36 Id. at p. 3.

37 Id. at p. 9.

38 Id. at p. 26. 39 Id. at p. 18. 40 Id. at p. 8. In a related response, only 31 .5 percent of respondents indicated that their firms are primarily proactive in

promoting the use of alternative fee strategies with their clients. Id. at p. 54.

41 Id. at p. 4. 42 Id. at p. 6.

43 Id. at p. 12. 44 Id. at p. 14.

45 Id. at pp. v-vi. The top four priorities listed included increasing revenue (15.2 percent), developing new business (14.6 percent), growth (12.4 percent), and profitability (10.7 percent). Id. at 62.

12

Indeed, adding value for clients was only eighth on the list of twelve items (mentioned

by 5.6 percent of survey participants) and improving efficiency in service delivery was

eleventh on the list (mentioned by only 2.8 percent of respondents).46

Against this background, it is somewhat surprising that a majority of the respondents

to the Altman Weil survey nonetheless believe that growth (in terms of lawyer head

count) is required for their firms' continued success. Indeed 55. 7 percent of those

surveyed responded affirmatively to that question, with only 35.7 percent responding

negatively.47 This is surely puzzling in the wake of five years of tepid demand growth and stagnant productivity and with little prospects of a quick turnaround in either of

those conditions. One possible explanation is that law firm leaders feel constrained to articulate some kind of strategic vision to help their firms weather the current storm,

and the message that we need to "build a bigger boat" is more politically palatable

than a message that we need to fundamentally change the way we do our work.

Unfortunately, however, for most law firms, only a commitment to re-think and revise their

basic models for managing their professional talent (partners, associates, and others); for

delivering their legal services; and for pricing their work is likely to produce competitive success in the long run. This is particularly true if one considers the possibility that the legal

market may be currently poised for what could be a dramatic reordering based on the same type of disruptive forces that have reordered many other businesses and industries.

In an intriguing recent article in the Harvard Business Review, Clay Christensen, Dina

Wang, and Derek van Bever argue exactly that.48 As they note:

In our research and teaching at Harvard Business School, we emphasize the impor

tance of looking at the world through the lens of theory - that is, of understanding the forces that bring about change and the circumstances in which those forces are op

erative: what causes what to happen, when and why .... Over the past year we

have been studying the professional services, especially consulting and law, through the lens of those theories to understand how they are changing and why ....

We have come to the conclusion that the same forces that disrupted so many

businesses, from steel to publishing, are starting to reshape the world of consulting [and law]. The implications for firms and their clients are significant.

The pattern of industry disruption is familiar: New competitors with new business

models arrive;49 incumbents choose to ignore the new players or to flee to

46 Id. at p. 62. 47 Id. at p. 35. 48 Clayton M. Christensen, Dina Wang, and Derek van Bever, "Consulting on the Cusp of Disruption," Harvard Business Re

view, Oct. 2013, p. 107. 49 It is interesting to note that, in 2013, we continued to see the emergence of a wide variety of non-traditional service

providers vying for market share in the legal space. This was particularly evident in the United Kingdom where sweeping changes to the regulation of legal practice enacted in 2007 have spawned a variety of "alternative business structure" ("ABS") arrangements that permit outside investments in law firms and the formation of multi-disciplinary partnerships in which firms owned by a variety of professionals and investors may offer a wide range of services, including legal services. In two noteworthy developments, DLA Piper announced its investment (along with other private investors) in Riverview Law, a combined barristers' chambers and solicitors' practice to offer fixed-fee commercial services for small- and mediumsized companies. See www.riverviewiaw.com/. And British Telecom decided to spin out its motor claims division, commercialize it with an ABS license, and offer claims services to other corporations operating large vehicle fleets. See "BT Launches Legal Service for Corporate Customers," Fleet News, Apr. 3, 2013, www.fleetnews.co.uk/news/2013/3/4/btlaunches-legal-service-for-corporate-customers/46362/. Meanwhile, in the United Slates, non-traditional service providers also continued to gain ground in the legal market. See Bill Henderson, "Bringing the Disruption of the Legal Services Market into the Law School Classroom," The Legal Whiteboard, Law Professor Biogs, LLC, Nov. 23, 2013, listing 16 non-tradttional providers currently working actively in the U.S. market. And, in Singapore, it was recenUy reported that Ernst & Young plans to expand its professional services to the legal services area in the Asia Pacific region. See Yun Kriegler, "E& Y Hires Former HSF Partner as It Mulls Singapore Legal Services Launch," The Lawyer, Dec. 10, 2013.

13

higher-margin activities; a disrupter whose product was once barely good

enough achieves a level of quality acceptable to the broad middle of the mar

ket, undermining the position of longtime leaders and often causing a "flip" to a new basis of competition.50

Pointing to the changed and enhanced role of corporate general counsel, the widespread availability of comparative information about law firms and their services, the

trend toward disaggregation of services by in-house counsel, and the emergence of new service delivery models and businesses, the authors argue that a disruptive transformation in the legal market may well already be underway. Although acknowl

edging that the relatively small number of genuinely "bet-the-company" matters may be immune from most of these pressures, the article concludes that ongoing disruption is virtually inevitable.

The ... [professionals] we spoke with who rejected the notion of disruption in their industry cited the difficulty of getting large partnerships to agree on revolutionary

strategies. They pointed to the purported impermeability of their brands and reputations. They claimed that too many things could never be commoditized in consulting [or law]. Why try something new, they asked, when what they've been doing has worked so well for so long?

We are familiar with these objections - and not at all swayed by them. If our long study of disruption has led us to any universal conclusion, it is that every industry will eventually face it. The leaders of the legal services industry would once have

held that the franchise of the top law firms was virtually unassailable, enshrined in practice and tradition - and, in some countries, in law. And yet disruption of these firms is undeniably under way ....

*

[A]lthough we cannot forecast the exact progress of disruption ... , we can say

with utter confidence that whatever its pace, some incumbents will be caught by surprise. The temptation for market leaders to view the advent of new competitors

with a mixture of disdain, denial, and rationalization is nearly irresistible. U.S. Steel posted record profit margins in the years prior to its unseating by the min

imills; in many ways it was blind to its disruption. As we and others have observed, there may be nothing as vulnerable as entrenched success. 51

Conclusion So, to end where we began - is growth important as a dominant law firm strategy? For some firms, the answer is no doubt yes, but for most firms the answer must surely be no. Far more important is to focus on those factors that can help reshape the firm to be

more responsive to the needs of clients, to deliver services in a more efficient and predictable manner, and to develop pricing models that reflect more accurately the value of

the services being delivered. For most firms, in other words, the goal should be not to "build a bigger boat" but rather to build a better one.

50 Christensen, Wang, and van Bever, note 49 supra, at 107-08. 51 Id. at p. 114.

14

GEORGETOWN LAW Center for the Study of the Legal Profession

The Center for the Study of the Legal Profession at Georgetown Law is devoted to promoting interdisciplinary research on the profession informed by an awareness of the dynamics of modern practice; providing students with a sophisticated understanding of the opportunities and challenges of a modern legal career; and furnishing members of the bar, particularly those in organizational decision-making positions, broad perspectives on trends and developments in practice. Georgetown Law's executive education program is an integral part of the Center's activities and uses a rigorous, research-based approach to the development of open enrollment and custom programs on leadership, strategy, leading teams, and collaboration for attorneys in law firms and legal departments.For more information on the Center and the executive education program, contact Mitt Regan at [email protected] .edu, or visit our websites:

Center for the Study of the Legal Profession and Executive Education http://www. law.georgetown.edu/academ ics/centers-inst itutes/legal-profession/index.cfm

Executive Education http://www.law.georgetown.edu/continuing-legal-education/executive-education/index.cfm

PEER MONITOR® Peer Monitor® is a dynamic, live benchmarking program that provides any-time access to critical firm assessment information and allows comparison against selected peers, with details for practice performance. It covers key metrics such as demand, rates, productivity, and expenses broken out by practice groups, offices, and individual timekeepers, enabling easy views to managing partners, practice group leaders, and other law firm leaders at summary and detailed levels. Peer Monitor® is a product of Thomson Reuters, the world's leading source of intelligent information for businesses and professionals. For more information, go to https://peermonitor.thomsonreuters .com.

2014 Report on the State of the Legal Market

GEORGETOWN LAW Center for the Study of the Legal Profession

THOMSON REUTERS

For more information, please visit us at peermonitor.thomsonreuters.com

© 2014 THOMSON REUTERS

PEER MONITOR®