Skillz Platform Inc. v. AviaGames Inc.
- Beth Freeman
- 5:21-cv-02436
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 4
In Skillz Platform v. AviaGames, Judge Freeman granted in part and denied in part Skillz’s motion, striking Zhang’s declaration but finding no Fifth Amendment waiver.
Skillz Platform Inc., AviaGames Inc., and Peng Zhang. The court removed Zhang’s supplemental declaration from consideration but did not find that he waived his Fifth Amendment privilege.
What happened
In Skillz Platform Inc. v. AviaGames Inc., Skillz asked the court to strike Peng Zhang’s supplemental declaration, which was filed after the relevant motions had already been decided. Skillz also asked the court to find that the declaration waived Zhang’s constitutional protection against self-incrimination and to require him to testify under oath. AviaGames opposed the motion.
The court struck the declaration because it was filed too late and was not relevant to deciding any pending motion. The court rejected Skillz’s waiver argument because Skillz had not shown that a fact-finder would rely on the declaration in a distorted way or that the declaration was sufficiently incriminating to amount to a waiver.
Judge Beth Labson Freeman granted in part and denied in part Skillz’s motion. She struck Zhang’s supplemental declaration but did not find that Zhang had waived his Fifth Amendment privilege.
The detailed version
- Skillz Platform Inc. v. AviaGames Inc. · No. 5:21-cv-02436
- Beth Freeman
- Jan. 22, 2024
Background
Skillz Platform Inc. moved to strike a supplemental declaration submitted by Peng Zhang on November 27, 2023. The declaration appeared to support a brief filed on August 18, 2023, and addressed the court’s discussion of “bots” in a later order concerning AviaGames Inc.’s request for relief from a magistrate judge’s nondispositive pretrial order. AviaGames opposed the motion, and Skillz filed a reply.
Skillz argued that the declaration was untimely and inconsistent with earlier statements by Zhang and AviaGames. Skillz also asked the court to find that the declaration waived Zhang’s Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination and to require Zhang to testify under oath. AviaGames argued that the declaration only clarified Zhang’s understanding of “bots” and that it did not waive the privilege.
Court’s Analysis
The court used its inherent authority—the court’s power to manage filings and proceedings—to strike the declaration because it was untimely. The relevant motions had already been considered and decided before the declaration was filed. The court concluded that the declaration was not relevant to deciding any motion and that no fact-finder needed to consider it.
The court separately considered whether the declaration waived Zhang’s Fifth Amendment privilege. Applying the two-part test discussed in the opinion, the court examined whether the declaration created a significant likelihood that a fact-finder would rely on a distorted view of the truth and whether Zhang had reason to know that his statements would be treated as a waiver. The court found that Skillz had not established either requirement. It also found that the declaration was not a direct, unequivocal admission sufficient to establish waiver.
Disposition
The court GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART Skillz’s motion to strike the supplemental declaration of Peng Zhang. It STRUCK the supplemental declaration but DENIED the request to find that Zhang waived his Fifth Amendment privilege. Judge Beth Labson Freeman entered the order on January 22, 2024.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.