District Judge Robert Lasnik, who has served for over 25 years on the federal bench in Seattle, emphasized that giving lawyers extra pages doesn’t necessarily result in more comprehensive or polished filings. In an order issued on Monday, he expressed his view that such expansive submissions often become verbose, repetitive, and waste both party and judicial resources.
Lasnik’s order dealt a blow to Amazon.com (AMZN.O) in a consumer class action accusing the company of illegally monitoring and collecting users’ communications on Alexa and Echo devices. The judge denied Amazon’s request—its second attempt—to file a summary judgment document spanning 42,000 words, or about 120 pages. Previously, Lasnik had permitted Amazon to submit a brief of 16,800 words, or roughly 48 pages.
“One hundred twenty pages, in contrast, is a novella (and a lengthy one at that),” Lasnik remarked in his three-page order. In his district, most substantive briefs are no longer than 24 pages.
Attorneys practicing in state and federal courts face a myriad of rules, including page limits, guidelines on acronyms and footnotes, and even regulations concerning font size and style. Neither Amazon nor the attorneys representing the consumers responded immediately to requests for comment on Tuesday. Lasnik also did not respond to a comment request left at his office.
The lawsuit, filed in 2021, accuses Amazon of violating some states’ wiretap laws by collecting and storing data from its Alexa voice-assistant software. The plaintiffs seek billions of dollars in damages, but Amazon denies any wrongdoing.
Amazon’s attorneys at Fenwick & West argued that it would be “impossible” for them to make their case in 16,800 words, given the need to address circumstances involving 10 individual plaintiffs. “Amazon will suffer significant unfair prejudice if it is not allowed to properly defend this lawsuit challenging one of its flagship services,” the company told Lasnik earlier this month.
The consumers’ lawyers from Labaton Keller Sucharow and Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd urged Lasnik to reject Amazon’s request. Lasnik agreed, stating that allowing Amazon to submit a 120-page brief would overburden the court and drain judicial and party resources.
Lasnik, who previously served as a Washington state court judge before his 1998 confirmation to the federal bench, has gained recognition for occasionally citing lyrics from singer-songwriter Bob Dylan in his rulings. The case, titled Kaeli Garner v. Amazon.com, is being heard in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, case number 2:21-cv-00750-RSL.
Representing the plaintiffs are Michael Canty of Labaton Keller Sucharow and Paul Geller of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd, while Amazon is represented by Jedediah Wakefield and Brian Buckley of Fenwick & West.
