Haocheng v. YouTube Inc. et al
| Qian Haocheng and Haocheng Qian |
| YouTube Inc., Google Inc. and Google Inc |
| 3:2023cv00513 |
| April 24, 2023 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Thomas O Farrish |
| Sarala V Nagala |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 28, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 21
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER. SELF-REPRESENTED FILERS ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE JUDGE'S STANDARD ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER WHICH IS ATTACHED. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 6/6/2023.(Bozek, M.)
|
|
Set Deadline as to #13 MOTION to Dismiss the Complaint. Responses due by 6/27/2023. (Bozek, M.)
|
|
Filing 20
ORDER granting #17 Motion by Self-Represented Litigant to Participate in Electronic Filing. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 06/06/2023. (Kuegler, Adam)
|
|
Filing 19
ORDER granting in part #16 Motion for Extension of Time. Plaintiff requests a three-week extension of time to respond to Defendants' motion to dismiss. In doing so, Plaintiff discusses the need to review and screen evidence, including more than 9,000 video programs on Defendants' platform, and the need to translate documents. At the outset, Plaintiff's request for an extension of time does not comply with Local Rule 7(b), which provides in part: "All motions for extensions of time shall include a statement of the movant that (1) the movant has inquired of all non-moving parties and there is agreement or objection to the motion, or that (2) despite diligent effort, including making the inquiry in sufficient time to afford non-movant a reasonable opportunity to respond, the movant cannot ascertain the position(s) of the non-movant(s). All such motions shall also indicate the number of motions for extension of time that have previously been filed by the movant with respect to the same time limitation." In light of Plaintiff's pro se status, the Court will proceed to consideration of her request for an extension of time. The Court notes, however, that any future motions for extensions of time must strictly comply with all requirements of Local Rule 7(b).Turning to the merits of Plaintiff's motion, which states that Plaintiff plans to submit "evidence" with the opposition, the Court notes that Defendants have moved to dismiss this action for insufficient service of process and failure to state a claim. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(5), 12(b)(6). Although evidence pertaining to Plaintiff's service of a summons and the complaint on Defendants may be relevant to Plaintiff's response to Defendants' argument concerning improper service, the Court generally may only consider the allegations on the face of the complaint, written instruments attached to the complaint, statements or documents incorporated into the complaint by reference, and documents upon which the complaint relies heavily in assessing a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. See Chambers v. Time Warner, Inc., 282 F.3d 147, 152-53 (2d Cir. 2002). Because the issues raised in the motion to dismiss are narrow, and because the Court is limited in what it can review in connection with the motion, the Court will not grant Plaintiff a lengthy extension to review the thousands of videos Plaintiff has uploaded to Defendants' platform(s). In light of the representation that Plaintiff requires translation services, however, the Court will grant Plaintiff an additional two weeks to respond to Defendants' motion to dismiss. Plaintiff's deadline for responding to Defendants' motion to dismiss (ECF No. #13 ) is hereby extended until June 27, 2023. Plaintiff is directed to contact the New Haven Legal Aid Association's Federal Pro Se Program at nhlegal.org/federalprose to inquire whether it can assist Plaintiff in responding to Defendants' motion or in filing and serving an amended complaint.Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 06/06/2023. (Kuegler, Adam)
|
|
Filing 18
Consent to Electronic Notice By Self-Represented Litigant, by Qian Haocheng. (Mendez, D)
|
|
Filing 17
MOTION By Self-Represented Litigant To Participate In Electronic Filing, by Qian Haocheng. (Mendez, D)
|
|
Filing 16
MOTION for Extension of Time to file an answer and evidence, by Qian Haocheng. (Mendez, D)
|
|
Filing 15
Supplemental Memorandum in Support re #13 MOTION to Dismiss the Complaint filed by Google Inc, YouTube Inc.. (Williams, Jr., LaMarte)
|
|
Filing 14
ORDER. In their motion to dismiss at ECF No. #13 , Defendants make the argument that they were not properly served under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(h). In doing so, Defendants contend that, although Rule 4(h)(1)(A) permits service in the manner prescribed by Rule 4(e)(1), Rule 4(e)(1) does not provide for service by mail but instead allows for service in compliance with state law. Defendants assert that, because service by mail is not permitted under Connecticut state law, Rule 4(e)(1) does not provide a basis for effecting service by mail. Rule 4(e)(1), however, allows for service by "following state law for serving a summons in an action brought in courts of general jurisdiction in the state where the district court is located or where service is made." (emphasis added). Here, Plaintiff has averred that service was effected by mailing documents to Defendants in California. ECF No. #8 . By May 31, 2023, Defendants shall file a supplemental memorandum addressing whether California law provided a basis for Plaintiff to serve Defendants by mail pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 4(h)(1)(A) and 4(e)(1), and whether such service was effective under Rule 4. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 05/24/2023. (Kuegler, Adam)
|
|
Set Deadline: Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 7/6/2023. (Bozek, M.)
|
|
Filing 13
MOTION to Dismiss the Complaint by Google Inc, YouTube Inc..Responses due by 6/13/2023 (Attachments: #1 Memorandum in Support of Motion to Dismiss, #2 Rule 12(a) Notice, #3 Certificate of Service)(Williams, Jr., LaMarte)
|
|
Filing 12
Disclosure Statement by Google Inc identifying Other Affiliate XXVI Holdings Inc., Other Affiliate Alphabet Inc. for Google Inc. (Williams, Jr., LaMarte)
|
|
Filing 11
Disclosure Statement by YouTube Inc. identifying Other Affiliate XXVI Holdings Inc., Other Affiliate Alphabet Inc., Other Affiliate Google LLC for YouTube Inc.. (Williams, Jr., LaMarte)
|
|
Filing 10
NOTICE of Appearance by LaMarte Williams, Jr. on behalf of Google Inc, YouTube Inc. (Williams, Jr., LaMarte)
|
|
Filing 9
ORDER. The Court has reviewed Plaintiff's affidavit of service. ECF No. #8 . Whether Plaintiff has satisfied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(c), which requires service of both the complaint and a summons on each defendant, is unclear. By May 24, 2023, Plaintiff shall file a notice clarifying which documents Plaintiff claims to have served on Defendants by mail. Upon receipt of Plaintiff's notice, the Court will determine whether Plaintiff must take any additional steps before a deadline can be set for Defendants to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 05/17/2023. (Kuegler, Adam)
|
|
Filing 8
AFFIDAVIT of Service served on YouTube Inc. and Google Inc. on May 1, 2023, filed by Qian Haocheng. (Mendez, D)
|
|
Filing 7
ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 and LR 4 as to *Google Inc., YouTube Inc.* with answer to complaint due within *21* days. *Qian Haocheng* *15 Carolyn Ln* *North Windham, CT 06256*. (Samson, Jessalyn)
|
|
Filing 6
NOTICE TO COUNSEL/SELF-REPRESENTED PARTIES : Counsel or self-represented parties initiating or removing this action are responsible for serving all parties with attached documents and copies of #1 Complaint filed by Qian Haocheng, 2 Notice re: Disclosure Statement, #3 Order on Pretrial Deadlines, #4 Electronic Filing Order, and #5 Standing Protective Order. Signed by Clerk on 4/24/2023.(Samson, Jessalyn)
|
|
Filing 5
STANDING PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 4/24/2023.(Samson, Jessalyn)
|
|
Filing 4
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 4/24/2023.(Samson, Jessalyn)
|
|
Filing 3
Order on Pretrial Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 6/23/2023. Discovery due by 10/24/2023. Dispositive Motions due by 11/28/2023. Signed by Clerk on 4/24/2023.(Samson, Jessalyn)
|
|
Filing 2
Notice: Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1, a disclosure statement must be filed with a party's first appearance, pleading, petition, motion, response, or other request addressed to the Court and must be supplemented if any required information changes during the case. Signed by Clerk on 4/24/2023.(Samson, Jessalyn)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against Google Inc. and YouTube Inc., filed by Qian Haocheng.(Samson, Jessalyn)
|
|
Filing fee received from Qian Haocheng: $ 402, manual receipt number 605690. (Samson, Jessalyn)
|
|
Judge Sarala V. Nagala and Judge Thomas O. Farrish added. (Shafer, J.)
|
|
Request for Clerk to issue summons as to Google Inc. and YouTube Inc. (Samson, Jessalyn)
|
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
