Penske Media Corporation v. Shutterstock, Inc.
- Vyskocil
- 1:20-cv-04583
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Penske Media v. Shutterstock, Judge Vyskocil ordered discovery and filing deadlines and denied Shutterstock’s premature expert-exclusion motion.
Penske Media Corporation and Shutterstock, Inc.; the order also concerns the use of Karl Walter’s expert testimony and the parties’ future summary-judgment and mediation proceedings.
What happened
In Penske Media Corporation v. Shutterstock, Inc., the court issued an order after a pre-motion conference. It required Penske Media Corporation to finish producing documents by November 14, 2022.
The order also required the parties to refile sealed or redacted documents, file any applicable notices of dismissal, and submit a joint letter about briefing for their partial summary-judgment motions and possible mediation. The court warned that it could consider sanctions, including preventing the use of evidence, if Penske Media failed to comply with the document-production requirement.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil denied Shutterstock, Inc.’s anticipated motion to exclude Karl Walter’s expert testimony because it was premature. The court said the motion could be renewed if needed during pretrial motion practice.
The detailed version
- Penske Media Corporation v. Shutterstock, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-04583
- Vyskocil
- Nov. 10, 2022
Background
The court held a pre-motion conference in the action on November 7, 2022. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.
Orders Concerning Discovery and Filings
The court ordered Penske Media Corporation to complete its document production by November 14, 2022. If Penske Media failed to produce all relevant materials, the court said it would consider a motion for sanctions, including preventing the use of evidence for summary judgment or trial, based on failure to comply with the order or otherwise produce discovery.
The court also ordered the parties to refile the Complaint and all other documents filed under seal or containing redactions by November 14, 2022. The parties were permitted to redact only confidential information concerning third-party agreements and confidential financial figures.
The parties were further ordered to file notices of dismissal for any claims to which dismissal applied and for which a notice had not already been filed. They also had to file a joint letter containing a proposed schedule for simultaneous briefing on their respective motions for partial summary judgment and addressing whether they agreed to use the court-annexed mediation program or a Magistrate Judge, or instead intended to pursue private mediation.
Expert-Testimony Motion
The court denied leave to file Shutterstock, Inc.’s anticipated motion to exclude the expert testimony of Karl Walter as premature. The court stated that the motion could be renewed if the need arose during pretrial motion practice.
Disposition
The order imposed discovery and filing requirements and denied the anticipated expert-testimony motion as premature. It did not decide the parties’ partial summary-judgment motions or state the disposition of any underlying claim.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.