Valjakka

Valjakka v. Netflix, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 14, 20244:22-cv-01490California911 words

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 PLAINTIFF’S

9 v. MOTION TO DISQUALIFY

WHITESTONE LAW FROM

10 NETFLIX, INC., REPRESENTING AIPI, LLC 11 Defendant. Re: ECF Nos. 251, 272

12 13 Now before the Court is Plaintiff Lauri Valjakka’s motion to disqualify Whitestone Law 14 from representing third party AiPi, LLC. ECF No. 251. The Court will grant the motion. 15 This is a patent infringement case brought by Plaintiff Valjakka against Defendant Netflix, 16 Inc. ECF No. 74. Third party AiPi, LLC has participated in the litigation at least by “managing 17 third party funding for Valjakka” and retaining counsel to represent him. ECF No. 233-1 ¶¶ 13, 18 14. For some period of time, AiPi also paid Valjakka’s legal fees. See Id. ¶¶ 29, 30; ECF No. 19 260-1 ¶ 4. 20 Whitestone Law has represented Valjakka in this matter at various times, including by 21 defending his deposition on October 12,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.