images have already been made. Once identified, Carpathia can likely reprovision those serversimmediately. But for the well over 1,000 uncopied servers that Carpathia is storing only becauseof the indictment – the issue still needs to be resolved.As to the past costs Carpathia incurred and the future costs from which Carpathia isseeking relief, the $9,000 per day expense ended on April 6. Carpathia then incurredapproximately $65,000 in expenses to have the servers safely transferred to one of its facilities.
The additional expenses for which Carpathia now seeks reimbursement are the cash expenses forrent of the leased space allocated to the storage of servers in the Carpathia climate-controlleddatacenter, as well as the book value of the equipment that is unavailable for revenue-generatinguses.
As Carpathia is in the business of renting space in its datacenter to clients, the storage of over one thousand servers is not trivial and consumes resources that otherwise would beavailable to generate revenue. The government is dismissive of the notion of Carpathia seekingreimbursement for the consumption of internal resources, but it is the equivalent of forcing ExtraSpace Storage, Inc. to devote 37 of its $1,000 per month rental units to store the defendants’evidence at no charge.
Both Carpathia and the storage facility count on the revenue from theleasable space to cover costs of operations.
This Court Has the Power to Enter an Order Governing the Handling of Evidence in a Criminal Case
The government sets forth an exceptionally narrow view of this Court’s jurisdiction,arguing that the Court does not have the power to enter an order regarding the handling of
Well over half of these expenses are out-of-pocket (rent, shipping company charges, airfare, etc); the remainder ismade up of Carpathia employees’ time taken away from their duties to assist in the movement of the servers.
Carpathia allocates the cash expenses associated with data center leases to each of its customers, as is commonpractice in the hosting industry.
Moreover, as discussed
, compensation for a third party’s use of internal resources is supported by caselaw.
See, e.g., U.S. v CBS Inc., et al
, 103 F.R.D. 365 (C.D. Cal. 1994) (allowing reimbursement for internal personnel’stime spent on non-party movie studios’ document production).
Case 1:12-cr-00003-LO Document 70 Filed 04/09/12 Page 3 of 13 PageID# 642