Stephen Matthew Avdeef, Plaintiff, v. Google, Inc., Defendant NO. 4:14-CV-788-A Signed July 21, 2015 McBryde, John, United States District Judge ORDER *1 On July 13, 2015, defendant, Google, Inc., filed a motion to compel plaintiff, Stephen Matthew Avdeef, to respond to the discovery requests served on plaintiff by defendant in early June 2015, which was accompanied by an exhibit volume. Plaintiff responded to the motion to compel by a document filed July 20, 2015. Defendant's motion is supported by the affidavit of its attorney of record, Blake A. Bailey, attesting to the authenticity of other items included in the exhibit volume. Plaintiff's response is not supported by any kind of verification. For the most part, the response is a series of statements and arguments that have virtually no relevance to the issues presented by defendant's motion to compel. The court is persuaded that defendant's motion to compel is meritorious, and that plaintiff should be ordered promptly to provide full and complete discovery in response to defendant's discovery requests. Therefore, The court ORDERS that: (1) Defendant's motion to compel be, and is hereby, granted. (2) At 10:00 a.m. on July 27, 2015, plaintiff shall produce for inspection and copying by defendant at the office of Blake Bailey, 115 Grand Avenue, Suite 222, Southlake, Texas, all documents responsive to requests for production numbered 1 through 32 of defendant's first request for production of documents (a copy of which is attached as Exhibit B to the exhibits to defendant's motion to compel filed July 13, 2015), which document production shall be consistent with the Definitions and Instructions set forth on pages 1-5 of said first request for production. The text of the requests to which this paragraph relates is attached to this order as Exhibit 1. Counsel for defendant shall be present at such time, date, and place in order to inspect and arrange for copying of such documents. If defendant wishes to have copies of all or some of the documents produced, plaintiff shall cooperate with defendant in arranging for the copying promptly to be accomplished at defendant's expense. At such time, date, and place plaintiff shall (a) deliver to defendant a list of each of the items produced for inspection and copying pursuant to this paragraph, describing each item sufficiently to distinguish it from the other items, and plaintiff shall indicate alongside each item on the list the number of the request for production to which the item is responsive, and (b) file a copy of such list, along with an appropriate cover page, with the clerk of court for inclusion with the papers in this action. (3) At the time, date, and place mentioned in paragraph (2) above, plaintiff shall deliver to defendant full and complete answers to the fourteen interrogatories of defendant's first set of written interrogatories to plaintiff (a copy of which is attached as Exhibit C to the exhibits to defendant's motion to compel filed July 13, 2015), consistent with the Definitions set forth on pages 1-3 of said set of written interrogatories.[1] The text of the interrogatories to be answered pursuant to this paragraph is attached hereto as Exhibit 2. Each answer to be provided to those interrogatories pursuant to this paragraph is to be preceded by the text of the interrogatory to which the answer is responsive. Said answers shall be made under plaintiff's oath. SIGNED July 21, 2015. Exhibit 1 DEFENDANT GOOGLE, INC'S FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO PLAINTIFF *2 Defendant Google, Inc., pursuant to Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, requests plaintiff to produce the following documents at the offices of Phelps Dunbar LLP, 115 Grand Avenue, Suite 222, Southlake, Texas 76092, within thirty (30) days after service of these requests. DEFINITIONS 1. “Communications” means any oral or written utterance, notation or statement of any nature whatsoever, by and to whomsoever made, including, but not limited to, correspondence, conversation, dialogues, discussions, interviews, consultations, agreements, and all other understandings between or among two or more persons. 2. “Defendant(s)” shall mean the Defendant named in this lawsuit, their agents, employees and/or representatives. 3. “Plaintiff,” “You,” and “Your” refer to the Plaintiff in this lawsuit, his agents, employees and/or representatives. 4. “Document(s)” shall be given its broadest meaning under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and includes, by way of illustration only and not by way of limitation, the following, any document, whether printed or reproduced by any process, or written or produced by hand or computer, and stored on computer drives and storage media, tapes, discs, drums, memory cores, or other computer media; computer printouts or other computer output; smart phones; texts, SMS, or other messages, voicemail or other recordings; metadata; notes; writings; drawings; graphs; data; lists; itineraries; correspondence; communications of any nature; telegrams; memoranda; notebooks of any character, charts; summaries of records of personal conversations; calendars; diaries or excerpts therefrom; logs; routing slips or memoranda; reports, publications; photographs; minutes or records of meetings; transcripts or oral testimony or statements; reports or summaries of interviews; written statements; affidavits; reports or summaries of investigations; agreements or contracts, including all modifications or revisions thereof; reports or summaries of negotiations; court papers; brochures; pamphlets; drafts of, revisions of drafts of, or translations of any document; tape recordings; dictation, recordings or belts; data compilations; and all tangible items. Any document with marks on any sheet or side thereof including by way of illustration only and not by way of limitation, initials, stamped indicia, any comment or notation of any character and not a part of the original text, or any reproduction thereof is to be considered a separate document for purposes of these Interrogatories and Requests for Production. “Document” also includes any copy of any original document, if the original is unavailable. 5. “Relate to” shall mean refers or pertains to, or is in any way logically or actually connected with, or affords any information regarding the matters discussed. 6. The terms “identify” or “identification” and “describe” or “description”: *3 a. When used in reference to an individual, shall mean to state his full name, present or last known residence and business affiliation and business address; b. When used in reference to a corporation, shall mean to state its full name, its state of incorporation and its principal place of business; c. When used in reference to a person other than an individual corporation, shall mean to state its official name, its organizational form and its address; d. When used in reference to a document, shall mean to state the type of document, date, author, addressee, title, its present location, the name and address of its custodian, and the substance of the contents thereof In lieu of identifying any document, copies thereof may be furnished; e. When used in reference to an agreement or contract, shall mean to state the names of each party to the agreement or contract, the date on which it was entered into, the place it was entered into, its terms and/or conditions, its present location, the name and address of its custodian; and the substance of the contents thereof If the agreement or contract has been amended, this must be stated and above information furnished on each such amendment In lieu of identifying any agreement or contract, copies thereof may be furnished; f. When used in reference to any act, occurrence, occasion, meeting, transaction or conduct (“act) shall mean to set forth the event or events constituting such act, its location, the date and persons participating, present or involved, and the documents relating or referring in any way thereto; and g. When used in reference to any discussion, shall mean, in addition to the foregoing, to set forth the substance of the discussion. 8. The “Plaintiff's Book” means the book authored by Plaintiff titled The Last Breath of Mars. INSTRUCTIONS 1. With respect to each request, in addition to supplying the information requested, you are to identify all documents that support, refer to, or evidence the subject matter of each pleading request and your answer to that request. 2. If any or all documents identified in this request are no longer in your possession, custody, or control because of destruction, loss, or any other reason, then do the following with respect to each and every such document: a. describe the nature of the document (e.g., letter or memorandum); b. state the date of the document; c. identify the persons who sent and received the original and a copy of the document; d. state in as much detail as possible the contents of the document; e. state the manner and date of disposition of the document; and f. state to which Request(s) the document or thing would have been responsive. 3. If you contend that you are entitled to withhold from production any or all documents identified in this request on the basis of the attorney-client privilege, the work-product doctrine, or other ground, then do the following with respect to each and every document: a. describe the nature of the document (e.g., letter or memorandum); b. state the date of the document; c. identify the persons who sent and received the original and a copy of the document; d. state the subject matter of the document; and *4 e. state the basis upon which you contend you are entitled to withhold the document from production. 4. When a pleading request requires you to “state the basis of” of a particular claim, contention, or allegations, state in your answer the identity of each and every communication, document and each and every legal theory that you contend supports, refers to, or evidences such claim, contention or allegation. 5. As used in this request, the word “or” appearing in a discovery request should not be read so as to eliminate any part of the request but, whenever applicable, it should be interpreted as “and/or.” For example, an interrogatory stating “support or refer” should be read as “support and/or refer” if an answer that does both can be made. 6. The use of any particular gender in the plural or singular number of the words defined under “captions” or “definitions” is intended to include the appropriate gender or number as the text of any particular interrogatory or demand for documents may require. First Request for Production Request for Production No. 1: Please produce all documents constituting, referring, or relating to any communication You or any of Your representatives or agents had with Lulu, Inc. related to Plaintiff's Book or the factual matters asserted in this lawsuit. RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 2: Please produce all contracts and written agreements between You or any of Your representatives or Agents and Lulu, Inc. related to Plaintiff's book. RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 3: Please produce all contracts, written agreements, and communications between You or any of Your representatives or Agents and any publisher, related to Plaintiff's book. RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 4: Please produce all contracts, written agreements, and communications between You or any of Your representatives or Agents and any retailer of books related to Plaintiff's book. RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 5: Please produce all documents constituting, referring, or relating to any communication You or any of Your representatives or agents had with Google, Inc. related to Plaintiff's Book or the claims asserted in this lawsuit. RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 6: Please produce all documents constituting, referring, or relating to any communication You or any of Your representatives or agents had with Derek Hoover related to Plaintiff's Book or this lawsuit. RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 7: Please produce all documents constituting, referring, or relating to any communication You or any of Your representatives or agents have had with any person who has allegedly obtained your book for free from Google. RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 8: Please produce all documents identifying each person who has allegedly obtained your book for free from Google. RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 9: Please produce all documents constituting, referring, or relating to any sale of your book. RESPONSE: *5 Request for Production No. 10: Please produce all documents constituting;, referring, or relating to any lost sale of your book that you claim resulted from any wrongful act by Google. RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 11: Please produce all documents constituting, referring, or relating to the registration of Plaintiff's Book with the United States Copyright Office. RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 12: Please produce all documents constituting, referring, or relating to Your contentions in paragraph 5 of Plaintiff's Original Complaint that Google “scanned the disputed novel in its entirety.” RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 13: Please produce all documents constituting, referring, or relating to Your contentions in paragraph 5 of Plaintiff's Original Complaint that Google “was allowing the entire Global Internet community of consumers to read the entire contents of the novel for free.” RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 14: Please produce all documents constituting, referring, or relating to Your contentions in paragraph 5 of Plaintiff's Original Complaint that Google maliciously and intentionally “relisted all of the disputed Copyrighted materials.” RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 15: Please produce all documents constituting, referring, or relating to Your contentions in paragraph 5 of Plaintiff's Original Complaint that Google has committed criminal actions with respect to you or Plaintiff's Book. RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 16: Please produce all documents constituting, referring, or relating to Your contentions in paragraph 6 of Plaintiff's Original Complaint that Google, without the permission of Plaintiff “has used, and continues to use, an online media distribution system to download the Copyrighted Novel, to distribute the Copyrighted Novel to the public, and/or to make the Copyrighted Novel available for distribution to others.” RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 17: Please produce all documents constituting, referring, or relating to any misrepresentations you allege Defendant made to You with respect to Plaintiff's Book or this lawsuit. RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 18: Please produce all documents constituting, referring, or relating to Your contentions in paragraph 6 of Plaintiff's Original Complaint that Google “has violated Avdeef's exclusive rights of reproduction and distribution,” RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 19: Please produce all documents constituting, referring, or relating to Your contentions in paragraph 6 of Plaintiff's Original Complaint that Google has infringed on Plaintiff's copyright. RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 20: Please produce all documents constituting, referring, or relating to Your contentions in paragraph 7 of Plaintiff's Original Complaint that Google has “maliciously and intentionally deprived Avdeef of material income in direct violation of Avdeef's protected copyright.” RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 21: Please produce all documents constituting, referring, or relating to any damages that you seek in this lawsuit. RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 22: Please produce all documents in your possession, custody, or control constituting, referring, or relating to any time Plaintiff's Book was available for full view through Google. *6 RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 23: Please produce all documents referring or relating to any sales of Plaintiff's book from 2006 to the present, including but not limited to the total sales made and the total amount of sales in dollars. RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 24: Please produce for inspection and examination the original of the document attached as Exhibit “A.” RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 25: Please produce for inspection and examination the original electronic version of the document attached as Exhibit “A.” RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 26: Please produce the originals of the entirely of the contents of the “purple file box” referenced in Exhibit “B” attached hereto for inspection and examination. RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 27: Please produce all documents constituting, referring, or relating to any communication You or any of Your representatives or agents had with anyone who claims they have obtained a copy of Plaintiff's Book for free, including, but not limited to, the “U.S. Anny Soldiers Stationed in Iraq” referenced in Plaintiff's Initial Disclosures. RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 28: Please produce all documents or communications relating to or identifying any person who purportedly obtained a copy of Plaintiff's Book from Google without authorization. RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 29: Please produce all documents or communications referring, relating or substantiating that Plaintiff's Book was available for full preview or that it would be viewed and downloaded in its entirety without authorization. RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 30: Please produce electronic copies of any and all copies of Plaintiff's Book that have allegedly been obtained from Google without authorization. RESPONSE: Request for Production No. 31: Please produce a copy of Plaintiff's Book. RESPONSE: Request for.production No. 32: Please produce a copy of each version of Plaintiff's Book that was provided to Lulu, Inc., including any paper copy or electronic copy that was provided to Lulu, Inc. RESPONSE: Respectfully submitted, ____________________ BLAKE A. BAILEY Texas State Bar No. 01514700 CHRISTOPHER R. JONES Texas State Bar No. 24070018 PHELPS DUNBAR LLP 115 Grand Avenue, Suite 222 Southlake, Texas 76092 (817) 488-3134 (817) 488-3214-Fax blake.bailey@phelps.com chris.jones@phelps.com ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT GOOGLE, INC. EXHIBIT A Tabular or graphic material set at this point is not displayable. EXHIBIT B Mr. Bailey, In your previous email you intimated that if I had evidence to the contrary, then your client would consider it I waited until now to present this, to see if yon would lie to the Court in the Joint Status Report and you did not disappoint. *7 The fact that you are now covering for Ms. Stanton and insulting me by manipulating the report after the fact to appear that I am the one who did not bother to bring up any form of settlement talks is quite upsetting. I did not bother to discuss settlement pursuant to the fact that Ms. Stanton opened the meeting with “I came all the way from California to meet you” where you interrupted with “by court order” then Ms. Stanton continued with “To make things clear, I do not have any authority to settle or to make any decisions concerning this case I am only here to recommend...” What this means, is you and Ms. Stanton just Lied To The Court IN FACT, Ms. Stanton mentioned that she had no authority to settle no less than FIVE TIMES, pursuant to the feet that on the third time she arrogantly continued to insult my intelligence, I was so offended, I began to count. Attached you will find a PDF scan of a page that was printed back in August of 2007. I am only offering this one page, because the discovery of all of the materials now absolutely ENDS THIS CASE. Your client has lied to the Court over and over again, and now, here is the proof that a FULL VIEW COPY DID EXIST EIGHT YERAS AGO, that my wife printed out back then...JUST...IN...CASE. I have already apologized to my wife after she and I, what can only be described as tore the house apart, to find materials I insisted were never printed, and I was wrong, and she was right Apparently, not bothering to tell me while I was communicating back and forth with Google back in 2007, a lie that can now be dismissed by material evidence, my wife went ahead and printed the book search just in case this matter ever became an issue later on and tossed it in a file box, and God Bless her for it! Google only has 2 forms of defense, 1. They lied to the Court and claimed I never contacted them before 2012, and even sent an analyst to lie to my face, and now that lie is busted. 2. They lied to the Court and claimed a “Full View” was never created, and now this lie is busted. Now I will give your client the benefit of the doubt, and postulate the two possible theories listed here. 1. When I wrote to Drummond in 2012, he instructed a senior technician to purge the servers and databanks of all traces of my materials, and thus, that is why Google is so cocky in being able to perform a forensic analysis, since everything was destroyed 2 ½ years ago in anticipation of a Federal District Court Litigation. 2. Back in 2007, Google realized that the Full View version was truly a mistake, and all the copies and data were destroyed out of true concern and to abide by the law. BUT, instead of admitting to the error, now they are lying to a Federal District Court to avoid taking responsibility for their actions, AND, even if this was indeed a honest mistake back then, that digital copy was stolen back then, and now it is banging around the Internet to this day still destroying the value of my Copyright, and they are still responsible for it, every single penny! No matter what, if Google does not present a foil compensation offer to put this matter to rest by close of Business on Tuesday, February 24, 2015, then Wednesday morning, I will present a letter brief to the Court offering the Honorable Judge McBryde the very “Burden Of Proof” that allowed you to escape the Motion For Injunctive Relief. Furthermore, I will be seeking a Motion For Sanctions to show the Court how you and your client have been lying to the Court to make a fool out of the Judge and have been personally insulting the Court And now, I am sure that the Court will agree with me that a hearing needs to be held that requires Ms. Stanton and Mr. Drummond to take the stand and personally explain to the Judge as to why they LIED TO THE COURT. Now that Google has no defense whatsoever, if they fail to conclude this matter fey close of business tomorrow, and I do not care that you are in trial, you can have another lawyer in your firm of 200 handle this, I will be seeking one million clicks a year for the nine years that this matter has transpired, which comes out to $105,480,000.00 plus punitive damages, AND, the entire value of the forty years of my copyright, since there is no way to reign in all of the digital “Full View” copies that now this attachment proves your client created ILLEGALLY, whether it was an honest mistake or not, now that they have tried to lie their way out of it, they are responsible for every penny this has cost me. *8 I do not care what you or you client has to say, now that I can provide an eight year old piece of evidence that was printed off, tossed in a purple file box, and apparently migrated its way out to the garage over the last decade, so DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS EMAIL. Send a new email that can be attached to any settle papers titled “SETTLEMENT OFFER” and draft whatever confidentiality agreement, but this one sheet of paper printed out eight years ago now ends this case. Mr. Bailey, I have already grown sick and tired of the gotcha game of lie to the Court and then force me to disprove it that Google is playing, and will surely irritate the Court now that the proof has been found, so DO NOT TAKE LIBERTIES TO INSULT ME AGAIN, so no low ball offers, your client will make it worth my time and compensate my family for the complete loss of my entire copyright for this novel FOREVER. In closing, I am sorry for the quality of the scan, but I am having problems creating PDF files with my printer and need to replace it. I tried to highlight my book listing as instructed by the Honorable Judge McBryde's Local Rules, but the highlighter does not seem to be picked up by this resolution and seems to just come out blotchy, but the Courts copy with be a clear and concise color copy, not a scanned PDF, just to note since I cannot email you a color copy and I would have to spend the rest of the week mailing it to you. Regards, Stephen Matthew Avdeef 1000 Kelley Drive Fort Worth Texas 76140-3618 817-293-0773 Pro Se Exhibit 2 YOU ARE HEREBY REQUESTED, under Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to serve your responses to Defendant Google, Inc.'s First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff to the offices of Phelps Dunbar LLP, 115 Grand Avenue, Suite 222, Southlake, Texas 76092, within thirty (30) days after service of these requests. DEFINITIONS 1. “Communications” shall mean any oral statements, conversation, meeting, or conference, formal or informal, at any time or place or under any circumstances whatsoever, whereby information of any nature was stated, written, recorded or in any way transmitted or transferred. 2. “Defendant” shall mean the Defendant named in this lawsuit, its agents, employees and/or representatives. 3. “Plaintiff”, “You,” and “Your” refer to the Plaintiff in this lawsuit, his agents, employees and/or representatives. 4. “Document(s)” includes, by way of illustration only and not by way of limitation, the following, whether printed or reproduced by any process, or written or produced by hand, and whether or not claimed to be privileged or otherwise excludible from discovery, namely: computer tapes, discs, drums, memory cores, or other computer media; computer printouts or other computer output; notes; writings; drawings; graphs; data; lists; itineraries; correspondence; communications of any nature; telegrams; memoranda; notebooks of any character; charts; summaries of records of personal conversations; calendars; diaries or excerpts therefrom; logs; routing slips or memoranda; reports, publications; photographs; minutes or records of meetings; transcripts or oral testimony or statements; reports or summaries of interviews; written statements; affidavits; reports or summaries of investigations; agreements or contracts, including all modifications or revisions thereof, reports or summaries of negotiations; court papers; brochures; pamphlets; drafts of revisions of drafts of or translations of any document; tape recordings; dictation, recordings or belts; data compilations; and all tangible items. Any document with marks on any sheet or side thereof, including by way of illustration only and not by way of limitation, initials, stamped indicia, any comment or notation of any character and not a part of the original text, or any reproduction thereof is to be considered a separate document for purposes of these Interrogatories and Requests for Production. “Document” also includes any copy of any original document, if the original is unavailable. *9 5. “Relate to” shall mean refers or pertains to, or is in any way logically or factually connected with, or affords any information regarding the matters discussed. 6. “Identify” or “describe”, when referring to a person, means you must state the following: (a) full name; (b) the present or last known residential address; (c) the present or last known residential and office telephone numbers; and (d) the present occupation or employer. 7. “Identify” or “describe”, when referring to a document, means you must state the following: (a) the nature (e.g., letter, handwritten notes) of the document; (b) the identity of the author and of the signor of the document and of the person on whose behalf or at whose request or direction the document was prepared or delivered; and (c) the present location of the document. 8. The “Plaintiff's Book” means the book authored by Plaintiff titled The Last Breath of Mars. 9. If any document or thing is responsive to any Request and has been lost, mutilated or destroyed, so state and identify each such document or thing, and state to which Request(s) the document or thing would have been responsive. First Set of Interrogatories Interrogatory No. 1: Please state all facts supporting Your contentions in paragraph 5 of Plaintiff's Original Complaint that Google had scanned Plaintiff's Book. ANSWER: Interrogatory No. 2: Please state all facts supporting Your contentions in paragraph 5 of Plaintiff's Original Complaint that Google “was allowing the entire Global Internet community of consumers to read the entire contents of the novel for free.” ANSWER: Interrogatory No. 3: Please state all facts supporting Your contentions in paragraph 6 of Plaintiff's Original Complaint that Google has infringed on Plaintiff's copyright. ANSWER: Interrogatory No. 4: Please state all actual and consequential damages Plaintiff has allegedly suffered, or claims will suffer, stemming from the actions made the subject of this lawsuit, including the detailed basis for each such calculation. ANSWER: Interrogatory No. 5: Please state all facts supporting Your contentions in paragraph 5 of Plaintiff's Original Complaint that Google maliciously and intentionally “relisted all of the disputed Copyrighted materials.” ANSWER: Interrogatory No. 6: Please state all facts supporting Your contentions in paragraph 5 of Plaintiff's Original Complaint that Google has committed criminal actions with respect to you or Plaintiff's Book. ANSWER: Interrogatory No. 7: Please state all facts supporting Your contentions in paragraph 6 of Plaintiff's Original Complaint that Google, without the permission of Plaintiff “has used, and continues to use, an online media distribution system to download the Copyrighted Novel, to distribute the Copyrighted Novel to the public, and/or to make the Copyrighted Novel available for distribution to others.” ANSWER: Interrogatory No. 8: Please state all facts supporting Your contentions in paragraph 6 of Plaintiff's Original Complaint that Google “has violated Avdeef's exclusive rights of reproduction and distribution.” ANSWER: Interrogatory No. 9: Please state all facts supporting Your contentions in paragraph 7 of Plaintiff's Original Complaint that Google has “maliciously and intentionally deprived Avdeef of material income in direct violation of Avdeef's protected copyright” *10 ANSWER: Interrogatory No. 10: Please identify all witnesses You intend to call to testify at the time of trial in this case. ANSWER: Interrogatory No. 11: Please state any misrepresentation you allege was made by Defendant or Defendant's representatives with respect to Plaintiff's Book. ANSWER: Interrogatory No. 12: Please identify the names and addresses of each person you claim have obtained a copy of the Plaintiff's Book from Google without authorization. ANSWER: Interrogatory No. 13: Please identify detailed information regarding the total sales of Plaintiff's Books, including sales amount, volume, purchasers, channel of sale, and gross and net revenue. ANSWER: Interrogatory No. 13: Please identify detailed information regarding the profit you have received from sales of Plaintiff's Books, including the number of sales, amount received for each sale, costa of goods sold, and gross and net revenue on an annual basis since Plaintiff's Book was first published. ANSWER: Respectfully submitted, BLAKE A. BAILEY Texas State Bar No. 01514700 CHRISTOPHER R. JONES Texas State Bar No. 24070018 PHELPS DUNBAR LLP 115 Grand Avenue, Suite 222 Southlake, Texas 76092 (817) 488-3134 (817) 488-3214-Fax blake.bailey@phelps.com chris.jones@phelps.com ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT GOOGLE, INC. Footnotes [1] The court notes that the 13th and 14th interrogatories in the set of interrogatories served by defendant on plaintiff both are identified as “Interrogatory No. 13.” Plaintiff is obligated to answer both of those interrogatories; and, because he is to repeat the interrogatory before his answer in each instance, his answers should clearly indicate which Interrogatory No. 13 he is answering.