McKinney v. Google, Inc. et al, No. 5:2010cv01177 - Document 51 (N.D. Cal. 2010)
Court Description: RESPONSE to re 42 Request for Judicial Notice, Plaintiffs Opposition to Request For Judicial Notice In Support of Defendants Google Inc. and HTC Corporations Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint by Mary McKinney. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Denying The Request for Judicial notice Filed By Defendants Google Inc and HTC Corp.)(Avila, Sara) (Filed on 8/25/2010) (Entered: 08/25/2010)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
McKinney v. Google, Inc. et al Doc. 51 Dockets.Justia.com 1 rebuttal evidence, cross-examination, and argument] from the parties and raises doubt as to 2 whether the parties received a fair hearing.” See Gen. Elec. Capital, 128 F.3d at 1083. Thus, 3 Federal Rule of Evidence 201 expressly provides that matters in dispute may not be judicially 4 noticed. See Lee, 250 F. 3d at 689 (“[A] court may not take judicial notice of a fact that is 5 ‘subject to reasonable dispute.’ ”) (quoting Fed. R. Evid. 201(b)). 6 Plaintiff disputes the authenticity of the documents proffered and assertions made by 7 Defendants’ attorneys and representatives. Defendants have failed to produce any undisputed 8 matters of public record for which judicial notice may properly be taken, and, thus, their request 9 must be denied. See Lee, 250 F. 3d at 689-90 (9th Cir. 2001). 10 V. CONCLUSION 11 For the reasons explained above, the Court should deny Defendants’ Request and refuse to 12 take judicial notice of Google’s Terms of Sale for the Nexus One and HTC’s express limited 13 warranty for the Nexus One. 14 DATED: August 25, 2010 15 Attorneys for Plaintiff Mary McKinney and the Proposed Class 16 17 By: 18 19 /s/ Sara D. Avila MILSTEIN, ADELMAN & KREGER, LLP Wayne S. Kreger Sara D. Avila WHATLEY DRAKE & KALLAS, LLC Joe R. Whatley, Jr. Edith M. Kallas Patrick J. Sheehan 20 21 22 LAW OFFICE OF HOWARD RUBINSTEIN Howard Rubinstein howardr@pdq.net 914 Waters Avenue, Suite 20 Aspen, Colorado 81611 Tel: (832) 715-2788 23 24 25 26 27 28 PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE sf-2855868 4 (CASE NO. 5:10-CV-01177-JW) 1 2 3 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have this 25th day of August 2010, served via the Court’s electronic filing system, a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing on counsel as follows: 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Edith M. Kallas Email: ekallas@wdklaw.com James Condon Grant Email: jimgrant@dwt.com Joe R. Whatley , Jr Email: jwhatley@wdklaw.com Joseph Edward Addiego , III Email: joeaddiego@dwt.com 12 13 14 15 16 Patrick J. Sheehan Email: psheehan@wdklaw.com Rosemarie Theresa Ring Email: rose.ring@mto.com Sara Dawn Avila Email: savila@maklawyers.com 17 18 Wayne Scott Kreger Email: wkreger@maklawyers.com 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 /s/ David Marin
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
