Valjakka
Valjakka v. Netflix, Inc.
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 LAURI VALJAKKA, Case No. 22-cv-01490-JST
8 Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND
9 v. DENYING IN PART NETFLIX’S
MOTION FOR AN ORDER TO SHOW
10 NETFLIX, INC., CAUSE AND SANCTIONS 11 Defendant. Re: ECF No. 315
12 13 Before the Court is Defendant Netflix, Inc.’s motion for an order to show cause and 14 sanctions against William Ramey and Ramey LLP, who formerly represented Plaintiff Lauri 15 Valjakka in this action. ECF No. 315. The Court will grant the motion in part and deny it in part. 16 I. BACKGROUND 17 The facts are well-known to the parties and the Court has summarized the background of 18 this action in detail in prior orders. In short, this is a patent infringement case brought by Valjakka 19 against Netflix. The present motion for sanctions arises out of Ramey’s conduct related to his 20 firm’s relationship with third party AiPi, LLC. AiPi has participated in the litigation at least by 21 “managing third party…