Erickson Productions Inc v. Kraig R Kast
- Donna Ryu
- 4:13-cv-05472
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Erickson Productions Inc. v. Kraig Rudinger Kast, Judge Ryu denied Kast’s third stay request and required renewed post-judgment discovery discussions.
Kraig Rudinger Kast’s third motion to stay was denied; Erickson Productions Inc., Jim Erickson, Kast, and Mariellen Baker were ordered to meet and submit a joint discovery update.
What happened
Erickson Productions Inc. v. Kraig Rudinger Kast concerned Defendant Kraig Kast’s request to pause issuance of an abstract of judgment while his appeal-related stay request was pending. The court had previously entered an amended judgment in Erickson’s favor for $788,141.16, including damages, attorneys’ fees, and costs.
The Ninth Circuit denied Kast’s request to stay enforcement and related discovery on May 17, 2022. Kast’s only argument for a further stay was therefore no longer available. The parties and Mariellen Baker also had not followed an earlier order requiring them to discuss the status of post-judgment discovery and submit one joint update.
Judge Ryu denied Kast’s third motion to stay. She ordered Erickson, Kast, and Baker to meet and discuss the discovery and submit a joint letter by June 7, 2022; she warned that failing to comply could lead to sanctions. The parties’ separate discovery letters were denied without prejudice.
The detailed version
- Erickson Productions Inc v. Kraig R Kast · No. 4:13-cv-05472
- Donna Ryu
- May 24, 2022
Background
After a remand from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the court awarded Erickson $450,000 in statutory damages for willful copyright infringement and entered judgment in Erickson’s favor on February 12, 2021. Kast later sought a new trial or an amended judgment and appealed. He also filed multiple motions to pause enforcement proceedings, including issuance of a writ of execution and post-judgment discovery.
On February 10, 2022, the court awarded Erickson $153,231.00 in attorneys’ fees and $1,949.16 in costs and entered an amended judgment for $788,141.16. The court denied Kast’s first and second motions to stay. It also found that Kast had not shown good cause to pause judgment-debtor discovery. The court had ordered Erickson, Kast, and Kast’s fiancé, Mariellen Baker, to meet and discuss the status of discovery ordered by Judge Howard R. Lloyd and to submit one joint letter. Instead, they filed separate letters.
Third Motion to Stay
Kast’s third motion sought to stay issuance of the proposed abstract of judgment. His sole argument was that issuance was premature because he had filed a stay motion with the Ninth Circuit in connection with his appeal. On May 17, 2022, the Ninth Circuit denied Kast’s motion for a stay of the writ of execution and related discovery. The district court therefore denied Kast’s third motion to stay.
Discovery Directions
The court again ordered Erickson, Kast, and Baker to meet and discuss the status of the post-judgment discovery ordered by Judge Lloyd. The discussion was to address Kast’s responses to five document requests and Baker’s responses to four document requests, which had been due June 11, 2018. The parties were ordered to submit a joint letter of no more than two pages by June 7, 2022. The court stated that failure to comply could result in sanctions.
The court denied the separate discovery letters without prejudice, meaning the ruling did not bar a later properly submitted request. The order concluded by denying Kast’s third motion to stay.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.