Case Document 193-15 Filed 01/24/19 Page 1 of 13 EXHIBITV COOLEY LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW SAN FRANCISCO Case Document 193-15 Filed 01/24/19 Page 2 of 13 COOLEY LLP MICHAEL G. RHODES (116127) WHITTY SOMVICHIAN (194463) BENJAMIN H. KLEINE (257225) (bkleine@cooley.corn) KRISTINE FORDERER (278745) 101 California Streeta 5th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111?5809 Telephone: (415) 693-2000 Facsimile: (415) 693-2222 Attorneys for Defendant FACEBOOK, INC. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION I.B., by and through his Guardian ad Litem Case No. BLF BRYAN FIFE and I.W., by and through his Guardian ad Litem STEVEN WRIGHT, RESPONSES AND individually and on behalf of all others similarly OBJECTIONS To FIRST Situated, Plaintiffs, V. FACEBOOK, INC, Defendant. SET SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES PROPOUNDING PARTY: RESPONDING PARTY: SET NUMBER: I.B., BY AND THROUGH HIS GUARDIAN AD LITEM BRYAN FIFE AND J.W., BY AND THROUGH HIS GUARDIAN AD LITEM STEVEN WRIGHT, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED DEFENDANT, FACEBOOK, INC. ONE Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33, Defendant Facebook, Inc. (??Faceboolc? or ?Defendant?) responds as follows to Plaintiffs? Special 'Interrogatories to Defendant Paeebook, RESPONSES OBJS To 1 . SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES (SET ONE) CASE No. BLF COOLEY LLP ATTORNEYS AT Law SAN Case Document 193-15 Filed 01/24/19 Page 3 of 13 Inc., Set One (the ?lnterrogatories?): I. GENERAL RESPONSES. 1. Defendant?s response to Plaintiffs? lnterrogatories is made to the best of Defendant?s present knowledge, information, and belief based on information reasonably available to Defendant as of the date of this response. Said response is at all times subject to such additional or different information that discovery or further investigation may disclose and, while based on the present state of Defendant?s recollection, is subject to such refreshing of recollection, and such additional knowledge of facts, as may result from Defendant?s further discovery or investigation. Defendant specifically reserves the right to supplement and amend these responses, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(e) or otherwise, and, if necessary, to assert additional objections arising from further investigation. 2. Defendant?s responses are and will be subject to and limited by any agreements the parties reach concerning the scope of discovery. 3. Defendant reserves the right to object on any ground at any time to such other or supplemental interrogatories as Plaintiffs may at any time propound involving or relating to the subject matter of these interrogatories. GENERAL OBJECTIONS. Facebook makes the following general objections, whether or not separately set forth in response to each interrogatory, to each instruction, definition, and Interrogatory made in Plaintiffs? first set of interrogatories: 1. Defendant objects to all de?nitions and Interrogatories to the extent they seek information protected by the attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine. Such information shall not be provided in response to Plaintiffs? lnterrogatories and any inadvertent disclosure shall not be deemed a waiver of any privilege with respect to such information or documents or of any work product immunity which may attach thereto. 2. Defendant objects to all de?nitions and Interrogatories to the extent they seek information regarding Facebook users or activities outside of the United States as overly broad and not relevant to the subject matter of this action or reasonably calculated to lead to the RESPONSES OBJS T0 2. SPECIAL Inrenaomromss (SET ONE) CASE No. BLF COO LEY LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW SAN FRANCISCU Case Document 193-15 Filed 01/24/19 Page 4 of 13 discovery of admissible evidence. Defendant will only respond to each lnterrogatory with information regarding users and activities in the United States. 3. Defendant objects to all de?nitions and Interrogatories to the extent they require Defendant to restore and/or search data sources that are not reasonably accessible on the grounds that such definitions and Interrogatories would subject Defendant to undue burden and expense. 4. Defendant objects to all de?nitions and lnterrOgatories as seeking information about a proposed class that does not meet the requirements for certi?cation under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. Notwithstanding any responses provided herein, Facebook reserves all rights to contest the propriety of class certi?cation and the scope of any proposed class on any and all grounds. 5. Defendant objects to all de?nitions and lnterrogatories to the extent they request documents or information pertaining to terms, policies, procedures, guidelines, public statements, disclosures, or positions other than those that are currently applicable or in use as not relevant to the subject matter of Plaintiff?s claims and as not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of . admissible evidence. 6. Defendant objects to Instruction number 4 to the extent it imposes on Defendant duties in excess of those called for by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Civil Local Rules. 7. Facebook further objects to Instruction number 7 and to all Interrogatories that call for information related to activities or events prior to October 1, 2011 as overly broad and not relevant to the subject matter of this action or reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and because it would subject Defendant to unreasonable and undue annoyance, oppression, burden, and expense. Defendant objects to the de?nition. of and each lnterrogatory containing the term as overly broad to the extent that it purports to define Defendant to include more than Facebook and its af?liates, of?cers, directors, agents, and employees. Subject to and Without waiving these objections, Defendant will construe the term to refer only RESPONSES Outs TO 3. SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES (SET ONE) CASE No. BLF COOLEY ATTDR liYS A't' LAW SAN FRANCES-ECO Case Document 193-15 Filed 01/24/19 Page 5 of 13 to Facebook and its af?liates, of?cers, directors, agents, and employees, and will respond to lnterrogatory containing that term accordingly. 8. Defendant objects to the de?nition of as overly broad to the extent the de?nition or those lnterrogatories would impose on Defendant an obligation in excess of what is called for by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 9. Defendant objects to the de?nition of the word ?pertaining? as overly broad, vague, and ambiguous, and as requiring subjective judgment on the part of Defendant?s attorneys and conclusions or opinion of counsel in violation of the attorney work product doctrine. Defendant further objects to the de?nition of ?pertaining? as overly broad insomuch as it purports to ?refer[] to all communications and meetings pertaining to the topic or matter identi?ed in the request.? Additionally, the de?nition is circular in that it references the term being de?ned within the de?nition. SPECIFIC OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES To INTERROGATORIES. Without waiving or limiting in any manner any of the foregoing General Objections, but rather incorporating them into each of the following responses to the extent applicable, Defendant responds to the speci?c interrogatories in Plaintiffs ?rst set of interrogatories as follows: INTERROGATORY No. 1: Please identify, separately as to FACEBOOK Credit, Gift Card and Payment Transactions, the number of transactions that originated from FACEBOOK accounts identi?ed as belonging or having belonged to someone less than 18 years old at the time of the transaction during each year from 2008 to date. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY No. 1: in addition to the General Responses and General Objections, which are incorporated herein by reference, Defendant objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is overly broad and seeks irrelevant information not reasonably calculated. to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and would subject Defendant to unreasonable and undue annoyance, oppression, burden, and expense. Defendant objects that the number of transactions originating from accounts belonging to users under the age of 18 at the time of the transaction is not relevant to RESPONSES OBJS T0 4. SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES (SET ONE) CASE No. BLF COOLEY LLP LAW SAN FRANCISCU Case Document 193-15 Filed 01/24/19 Page 6 of 13 Plaintiffs? claims that the minor Piaintiffs? purchases are void or voidabie under California law or to whether this action may be maintained as a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. Defendant further objects to this Request as overiy bread to the extent it seeks I documents potentially related to_Facebook Gift Cards and Facebook Payments, which are not the subject of Plaintiffs? lawsuit. Further, since acebook Gift Cards are a payment method, not the purchased item, transactions using Facebook Gift Cards are not distinct from transactions for the purchase of Facebook Credits or Payments. Defendant further objects to this Interrogatory as compound and consisting of multiple discrete subparts. Defendant additionally objects that the phrase ?identi?ed as belonging or having belonged? is vague and ambiguous. Subject to and without waiving the aforementioned objections, and pursuant to the partiesi protective order, Facebook responds as follows: CONFIDENTIAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER From February 23, 2008 to June 25, 2014, Facebook estimates that there were 13,231,136 transactions for the purchase of Facebook Credits by users whom Facebook can reasonably ascertain were (1) under age .18 at the time of the transaction and (2) are located within the United States. From February 23, 2008 to June 25, 2014, Facebook estimates that there were 322,873 transactions in Facebook Payments by users whom Facebook can reasonably ascertain were (1) under age 18 at the time of the transaction and (2) are located witt?n the United States iQFrom February 23, 20.8 to June 25, 2014, Facebook estimates that there were 186, 789 'itrans E'tiens for the purchase of Facebook Credits using acebook Gift Cards by users when} ?E-Facebook can reasonably ascertain were (1) under age 18 at the time of the transaction and (2) ated Within the United States . 2908-,to June 25, 2014, Facebook estimates that there were 16 605 'irtransacttoni 1n acebook Payments using Facebook Gift Cards by users where acebeek can reasonably (1) under age 18,? "wifhe tiine of the transaction and (2) are located RESPONSES OBJS TO 5. INTERROGATORIES (SET ONE) CASE No. 12-CV-01894 BLF COOLEY LLP ATTORN AT LAW SAN FRANCISCO Case Document 193-15 Filed 01/24/19 Page 7 of 13 PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE INTERROGATORY o. 2: Please identify, separately as to FACEBOOK Credit, Gift Card and Payment Transactions, the total dollar amounts of such transactions that originated from FACEBOOK accounts identi?ed as belonging or having belonged to someone less than 18 years old at the time of the transaction for the periods: a. February 23, 2008 to March 27, 2012; b. March 27, 2012 to September 12, 2012; c. September 12, 2012 to November 12, 2013; d. November 12, 2013 to the date of your answer. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY No. 2: In addition to the General Responses and General Objections, which are incorporated herein by reference, Defendant objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is overly broad and seeks irrelevant information not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and would subject Defendant to unreasonable and undue annoyance, oppression, burden, and expense. Defendant objects that data relating to transactions originating from accounts belonging to users under the age of 18 at the time of the transaction is not relevant to Plaintiffs? claims that the minor Plaintiffs? purchases are void or voidable under California law or to whether this action may be maintained as a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. Defendant further objects to this lnterrogatory on the grounds that the dollar amounts involved in any such transactions or subset of such transactions is in no way relevant to Plaintiffs? claims for declaratory relief or to whether this action may be maintained as a class action pursuant to Federal Ruie of Civil Procedure 23. Defendant further objects to this Request as overly broad to the extent it seeks documents potentially related to Facebook Gift Cards and Facebook Payments, which are not the subject of Plaintiffs? lawsuit. Further, since Facebook Gift Cards are a payment method, not the purchased item, transactions using Facebook Gift Cards are RESPONSES OBJS T0 6. SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES (SET ONE) CASE NO. 12-CV-01894 BLF CDOLEY LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW SA Case Document 193-15 Filed 01/24/19 Page 8 of 13 not distinct from transactions for the purchase of Facebook Credits or Payments. Defendant further objects to this Interrogatory as compound and consisting of multiple discrete subparts. Defendant additionally objects that the phrase ?identi?ed as belonging or having belonged? IS vague and ambiguous. Subject to and without waiving the aforementioned objections, and pursuant to the parties? protective order, Facebook responds as follows: CONFIDENTIAL PURSUANT TQ PROTECTIVE GREEK I I The chart below shows Facebook 5 reasonable estimate of the number of total dollai amount for purchases of Faceboolq Credits by users whom FacebOOk can reasonably ascertain were (1) under age :18 :at the time of the transaction and (2) are iocated within the United States _-fori_the indicated. in the left column: Time Period Dollar amount "From 2002-02.23 to 2012-03?27 $8,211,492.88 From 2012?0322 to 2012-09?12 $4,626,736.21 11101112012 09 13 to 21113 11? 12 $5,783,615.75 . 1111911121113 11 13 to 2014 06 23 . $0 00 Total -. .. .. -. -- 123 621 1144 113 The chart below shows .Facebook 5 reasonabl estimate of the humber of total dollar amo111i-t for purchaSes .1111 Facebook Payments by users whom Facebook can reasonably ascertain under age 18 at the time of the transaction and (2) are located Within the United States for the time periods indicated in the left column: Time Period Dollar amount From 200843223 to 2912-03~27 $0.00 From 2012-03-28 to 2012-09?12 $480,138.80 From 20l2~09~13 to 2013-11-12 $733,676.92 From 2013?1 1'13 to 2014?0625 $2,062,012.70 Total $3,275,228.42 The chart below shows Facebook?s reasonable estimate of the number of total dollar amount for purchases of Facebook Credits using Facebook Gift Cards by users whom Facebook RESPONSES OBJS T0 7. SPECIAL INTERROGATQRIES (SET ONE) CASE No. 12-CV-01894 BLF Coon?:Law SAN FRANCISCO Case Document 193-15 Filed 01/24/19 Page 9 of 13 If Time 'Perled 12111111 2008 02 23 to 21112 1:13 27 "$13111.13.62582; . i-From; 2012 1:13 28 1'0 21112 09 12 7$32313?l From 20120943 to 2013 11 12 $735380 . 12101112013 11 13 to 2014-06-25 - 5:30 00. ?fatal . 82 199 905 3a - The chart belew shows Faceboek 8 reasonable estimate of the number at total dollar amount for purchases in Facebook ?,ayments using Facebook Gift Cards by nSers whom Facebook can 1easonably ascertain were (1) under age 18 at the time of the transaction and (2) are located within the United States ferthetime periods- indicated in the left column: Time Period Dollar amount From 2008-02-23 to 201203427 $0.00 From 2012 03 28 to 2012 11212 -. $0.00 From 2012 09 :13 to 2013 11 12"? $381437.85 From 21113 11 13 10 2014311625" $215,143.64 Total $253,581.50. 1311131111 INTERROGATORY No. 3: Please identify, separately as to FACEBOOK Credit, Gift Card and Payment Transactions that originated from FACEBOOK accounts identi?ed as belonging or having belonged to someone less than 18 years old at the time of the transaction, the total dollar amounts of chargebacks for the periods: a February 23, 2008 to March 27, 2012: b. March 27, 2012 to September 12, 2012; c. September 12, 2012 to November 12, 2013; d. November 12, 2013 to the date of your answer. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY No. 3: In addition to the General Responses and General Objections, which are incorporated RESPONSES Oars ro 8. SPEC1AL INTERROGATOREES (SET ONE) CASE NO. 12-CV-01894 BLF COOLEY LLP AT'rnkN EYS AT LAW SAN FRANCISCO Case Document 193-15 Filed 01/24/19 Page 10 of 13 herein by reference, Defendant objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is overly broad and seeks irrelevant information not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and would subject Defendant to unreasonable and undue annoyance, oppression, burden, and expense. Defendant objects that data relating to transactions originating from accounts belonging to users under the age of 18 at the time of the transaction is not relevant to Plaintiffs? claims that the minor Plaintiffs? purchases are void or voidable under California law or to whether this action may be maintained as a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. Defendant further objects to this lnterrogatory on the grounds that the dollar amounts involved in any such transactions or subset of such transactions is in no way relevant to Plaintiffs? claims for declaratory relief or to whether this action may be maintained as a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. Defendant further objects to this Request as overly broad to the extent it seeks documents potentially related to Facebook Gift Cards and Facebook Payments, which are not the subject of Plaintiffs? lawsuit. Further, since Facebook. Gift Cards are a payment method, not the purchased item, transactions using Facebook Gift Cards are not distinct from transactions for the purchase of Facebook Credits or Payments. Defendant further objects to this lnterrogatory as compound and consisting of multiple discrete subparts. Defendant additionally objects that the phrase ?identified as belonging or having belonged? is vague and ambiguous. Defendant further objects that the term ?chargebacks? is vague and ambiguous. Facebook will construe the term ?chargebacks? to mean transactions that were reversed by the users? financial institution. Subject to and without waiving the aforementioned objections, and pursuant to the parties? protective order, Facebook responds as follows: CONFIDENTIAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER The cha.__below Shows Facebnok 5 reasonable estimate 0f the number of total doliar amount for chargebacks fm Facebook Credits that had been purchased by users whom Faoebook can reasonably-ascertain were (1) under age 18 at the time nf the transaction and (2) are located RESPONSES OBJS T0 9. SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES (SET ONE) CASE No. .BLF COOLEY LLP ATTUR HYS AT LAW SAN FRANCISCO Case Document 193-15 Filed 01/24/19 Page 11 of 13 ascertain were (1) under age 18 at the time of 1he transaction and (2) are located within the United- 6d States fer the time perieds indicated in th'le?c "Time Period - .. From 2008-0223 to 2012-03-27 I ?From 2012?0323111 2012?09-12?- 17101112012 09 1310 2013 11 12 I *?7365332313 - aria-mount 13101112013 11 13102014 05 25 . . $6,513.40 Total - .2- $2 418 071 62 The chart below shorts Faceboelr 3 reasonable estimate ef the number of total d" ar amount for chargebacks in Facebook Payments by users whom Facebook can reasonably States for the time periods indieated 1n the left column Time Period Dollar amount From -- $0.00i From 2012?0323-51152012411942 $741.29 From 2012 09 1310201311 .121. - 334,670.05 From 2013 11 13 to 2014 115 25' -. $188,077.40 Tomi -- - . - . - - - $223,433.75 PROTECTIVE ORDER INTERROGATORY No. 4: Please identify, separately as to FACEBOOK Credit, Gift Card and Payment Transactions that originated from FACEBOOK accounts identi?ed as belonging or having belonged to someone less than 18 years old at the time of the transaction, the total dollar amounts of refunds for the periods: a February 23, 2008 to March 27, 2012: b. March 27, 2012 to September 12, 2012; c. September 12, 2012 to November 12, 2013; d. November 12, 2013 to the date of your answer. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY No. 4: In addition to the General Responses and General Objections, which are incorporated herein by reference, Defendant objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is overly broad RESPONSES OBJS TO 10. SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES (SET ONE) CASE NO. BLF COOLEY LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW SAN FRANCISCO Case Document 193-15 Filed 01/24/19 Page 12 of 13 and seeks irrelevant information not reasonably calculated. to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and would subject Defendant to unreasonable and undue annoyance, oppression, burden, and expense. Defendant objects that data relating to transactions originating from accounts belonging to users under the age of 18 at the time cf the transaction is not relevant to Plaintiffs? claims that the minor Plaintiffs? purchases are void or voidable under California law or to whether this action may be maintained as a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. Defendant further objects to this Interrogatery on the grounds that the dollar amounts involved in any such transactions er subset of such transactions is in no way relevant to Plaintiffs? claims for declaratory relief or to whether this action may be maintained as a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. Defendant further objects to this Request as overly broad to the extent it seeks documents potentially related to Facebook Gift Cards and Facebook Payments, which are not the subject of Plaintiffs? lawsuit. Further, since Facebook Gift Cards are a payment method, not the purchased item, transactions using Facebook Gift Cards are not distinct from transactions for the purchase of Facebook Credits or Payments. Defendant further objects to this lnterregatory as compound and consisting of multiple discrete subparts. Defendant additionally objects that the phrase ?identi?ed as belonging or having belonged? is vague and ambiguous. Defendant further objects that the term ?refunds? is vague and ambiguous. Defendant will construe ?refunds? to mean transactions in which Facebook restored funds to a user?s payment instrument. Subject to and without waiving the aforementioned objections, and pursuant to the parties? protective order, Facebook responds as follows: amine-mam? TO PROTECTIVE onus-R by users When: Faceboek can reasonably ascertain were (1) under age .l8 at the time of the transaction any I: are located within the United States for the time per-i. "indicated in the left RESPONSES Ours T0 1. SPECIAL (Star Ous) CASE No. 12-CV-01894 BLF COOLEY LLP ATTORNEYS-2 AT LAW SAN Case Document 193-15 Filed 01/24/19 Page 13 of 13 column: Time Period Dollar amount From 2008-02-23 13 2012-93327 From 2012?03-28 13 2012?09?12 $1271251-80 From 2012-09 13 13 21113 11 12 3135123040 From 2013 11 13 to 2914 03-25 $090 - T3131 - $630 444 44 Siates for the ti111e 11er1ods 1111110811611 111 the left 0011111111: The chart below shows Facebook 5 13333331313 estimate.- of the number of total (10111111 amount fo1 chargebacks in Facebook Payments by users whom Facebook can 1easonab1yf. Time Ei??t?ibd '5 901131? amount 2812?0327 $0.00 From 21112.03 22813 291209 12 324497 8131321112 119 1313 -2913 11 12 312-16689? g. From 21113 11 1313 2014 06-25 1.3131 . $86 752 53 CONFIDENTI PURSUANT 10 ORDER Dated: July 17, 2014 COOLEY LLP MICHAEL RHODES (116127) WHITTY SOMVICHIAN (194463) BENJAMIN H. KLEINE (257225) KRISTINE FORDERER (278745) Whitty Somviohian 108171075 12. Whitty Somvichian (194463) Attorneys for Defendant FACEBOOK, INC. RESPONSES OBJS To INTERROGATORIES (SET ONE) CASE No. BLF