UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTCENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISIONCIVIL MINUTES--GENERAL

Case No. CV 07-6835 AHM (AJWx) Date: August 6, 2009Title: UMG RECORDINGS, INC., et al. v. DIVX, INC.===================================================================

PRESENT:

HON.ANDREW J. WISTRICH, MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Ysela BenavidesDeputy Clerk Court Reporter

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFFS: ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANTS:None Present None Present

ORDER REGARDING DIVX’S MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TOINTERROGATORIES 10, 11, AND 13

AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION 11 AND 96

As to interrogatories 10, 11 and 13, the motion is

denied

. In thecourt’s view, these interrogatories should be treated as oneseparately countable interrogatory for each of the approximately2600 allegedly infringed works, each possessing three non-separately countable subparts. This obviously exceeds the numericallimit on the number of interrogatories that may be served. SeeFed. R. Civ. P. 33(a). To instead treat these as three separatelycountable interrogatories, each possessing approximately 2600 non-separately countable subparts would defeat the purposes of thenumerical limit in the particular circumstances presented here.See generally Advisory Committee Note to 1993 Amendment to Fed. R.Civ. P. 33. In addition to violating the numerical limit, each ofthese interrogatories runs afoul of the principles contained inFed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2)(C). Insofar as interrogatory 10 isconcerned, Divx has not identified a single example of an allegedlyinfringed work that was distributed in appreciable quantitieswithout notice prior to March 1, 1989, or an allegedly infringedwork that was distributed after March 1, 1989 in a manner thatdeprived Divx of access to the knowledge that the work was subjectto copyright. Therefore, collecting the information sought byinterrogatory 10 does not appear to be a sufficiently productiveenterprise that the court would be warranted in imposing thesubstantial burden of doing so on UMG. As to interrogatories 11and 13, UMG already has produced its licenses, and it confirmedduring the hearing that its production is complete. Therefore,insofar as entities other than UMG are concerned, Divx either hasmuch of the relevant information or can obtain it for itself aboutas readily as can UMG. Insofar as UMG’s own policies and practicesare concerned, the documents UMG already has produced, augmented bythose it is required by this order to produce in response torequest for production 96, should provide Divx with much of theinformation it needs.