Courthouse News Service v. Michael Planet

Filing 34

Submitted (ECF) excerpts of record. Submitted by Appellant Courthouse News Service. Date of service: 05/29/2012. [8511359] (REM)

U.S. Court of Appeals Docket No. 11-57187

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCIDT
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE,
Plaintiffl Appellant,
vs.
MICHAEL PLANET, in his official capacity as Court Executive Officer/ Clerk of
the Ventura County Superior Court,
Defendant/Appellee.

On Appeal from a Decision of the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Case No. CV11-08083 R
The Honorable Manuel Real

EXCERPTS OF RECORD
VOLUME I
Roger Myers, Esq.
Rachel Matteo-Boehm, Esq.
David Greene, Esq.
Leila Knox, Esq.
BRYAN CAVE LLP
560 Mission Street, 25th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105-2994
Tel: [phone]
rachel.matteo-boehm @bryancave.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff-Appellant
COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE

#79646 vl saf

VOLUME 1
Description

C.D. Cal.
Docket #

Page #

Order Granting Defendant's Motion To Dismiss
And Abstain

38

1

Reporter's Transcript Of Proceedings

44

3

C.D. Cal.
Docket #

Page #

Plaintiff's Notice Of Appeal To The United States
Court Of Appeals For The Ninth Circuit

40

13

Excerpts Of Declaration Of Cheryl Kanatzar In
Support Of Defendant's Opposition To Plaintiff s
Motion For Preliminary Injunction

25-2

15

Excerpts Of Plaintiff Courthouse News Service's
Opposition To the Motion To Dismiss And Abstain
Of Defendant Michael Planet

24

19

Excerpts Of Memorandum Of Points And
Authorities In Support Of Defendant's Motion To
Dismiss And Abstain

21

21

21-1

27

22

30

22-1

34

VOLUME 2
Description

Defendant's Notice Of Motion And Motion To
Dismiss And Abstain
Defendant's Request For Judicial Notice In Support
Of Motion To Dismiss And Abstain
Exhibits To Defendant's Request For Judicial
Notice In Support Of Motion To Dismiss And
Abstain

2
#79646 vl saf

Description

C.D. Cal.
Docket #

Page #

Notice Of Motion And Motion For Preliminary
Injunction

3

58

Complaint For Injunctive And Declaratory Relief

1

60

District Court Civil Docket Sheet For Case No.
2:11-cv-08083-R MAN

--

122

3
#79646 vl saf

Care

1

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 38

Filed 11/30/11

Page 1 of 2 Page 10 #:929

Robert A. Naeve (State Bar No. 106095)
[e-mail]
EricaL. Reilley (State Bar No. 211615)
[e-mail]
JONES DAY
3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 800
Irvine, CA 92612
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

JS-6

Attorneys for Defendant
MICHAEL PLANET, IN HIS OFFICIAL
CAPACITY AS COURT EXECUTIVE
OFFICER/CLERK OF THE VENTURA
COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

12

13
14

COURTHOUSE

15

Plaintiff,

16
17
18
19

NEWS SERVICE,

Case No. CVI1-08083

R (MANx)

Assigned for all purposes to
Hon. Manuel L. Real

v.
MICHAEL PLANET, IN HIS
OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS COURT
EXECUTIVE OFFICER/CLERK OF
THE VENTURA COUNTY
SUPERIOR COURT,

ORDER GRANTING
DEFENDANT'S
MOTION
DISMISS AND ABSTAIN

TO

20
Defendant.

21

22

III

23

III

24

III

25

III

26

III

27

III

28

III
Order Granting Def's
Motion to Dismiss and Abstain
Case No. CV 11-08083 R (MANx)

ER 1

C~e

:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 38

Filed 11/30/11

Page 2of2

Page ID #:930

1

A Motion to Dismiss and Abstain ("Motion") filed by Defendant Michael D.

2

Planet, in his official capacity as Executive Officer and Clerk of the Superior Court

3

of California, County of Ventura, came on for hearing on November 28, 2011, at

4

10:00 a.m., before the Honorable Manuel L. Real. Rachel Matteo-Boehm and

5

David Greene appeared on behalf of Plaintiff Courthouse News Service: Robert A.

6

Naeve and Erica L. Reilley appeared on behalf of Defendant Michael D. Planet.

7

Having considered all the papers submitted, oral argument, and the Court's

8

file in this matter, and good cause having been shown, the Court hereby ORDERS

9

as follows:

10

(1)

Defendant's Motion is GRANTED.

11

(2)

The Court dismisses Plaintiffs Third Claim for Relief for violation of

12

California Rule of Court 2.550 because it is barred by the Eleventh Amendment to

13

the United States Constitution;

14

(3)

The Court abstains and dismisses the remainder of Plaintiffs

15

Complaint for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief under the equitable abstention

16

doctrine enunciated in O'Shea v. Littleton, 414 U.S. 488 (1974), and its progeny;

17

and

18

(4)

The Court further abstains and dismisses the remainder of Plaintiffs

19

Complaint under the abstention doctrine enunciated in Railroad Commission of

20

Texas v. Pullman Co., 312 U.S. 496 (1941).

21

IT IS SO ORDERED.

22
23

Dated: November 30,2011
Hon. Manuel L. Real
U.S. District Court Judge

24
25
26
27
28
- 1-

Order Granting Def's
Motion to Dismiss and Abstain
Case No. CV 11-08083 R (MANx)

ER2

~se

2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 44

Filed 01/04/12

Page 1 of 10 Page ID #:946
1

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

HONORABLE MANUEL L. REAL, JUDGE PRESIDING

5
6

COURTHOUSE NEWS SERVICE,
Plaintiff,

7

8
9

vs.

No. CV 11-8083-R

MICHAEL PLANET, etc., et. a1.,

10

MOTION FOR
PRELIM INJUNCTION

Defendants.

11

12
REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
13
Los Angeles, California
14
Monday, November 28, 2011
15
10:59 A.M.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Monday, November

THERESA A. LANZA, RPR, CSR
Federal Official Court Reporter
3470 12th Street, Rm. 134
Riverside, California
92501
[phone]
WWW.THERESALANZA.COM

28, 2011

COURTHOUSE NEWS vs. PLANET

ER3

4

Case 2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN Document 44

Filed 01/04/12

Page 2 of 10 Page ID #:947
2

1

2

APPEARANCES:

3

4

On Behalf of Plaintiff:

5

HOLME ROBERTS & OWEN LLP
BY: Rachel Matteo-Boehm
BY: David Green
560 Mission Street
25th Floor
San Francisco, California
415-268-1996

6
7
8

94105-2994

9

10

On Behalf of Defendants:

11

JONES DAY
BY: Erica L. Reilley
BY: Robert A. Naeve
555 South Flower Street
Fiftieth Floor
Los Angeles, California
213-489-3939

12
13
14

90071

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Monday, November

28, 2011

COURTHOUSE

NEWS vs. PLANET

ER4

C~se 2: 11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 44

Filed 01/04/12

Page 3 of 10 Page ID #:948
3

1

I N D E X

2
3

Page
MOTION... .......

........

....

.....

4

4

5
6
7
8
9

10
11
12
13

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Monday, November

28, 2011

COURTHOUSE NEWS vs. PLANET

ER5

&se 2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN Document 44

Filed 01/04/12

Page 4 of 10 Page 10 #:949
4

1

Los Angeles, California; Monday, November 28, 2011; 10:59 A.M.

2

-000-

THE CLERK:

3
4

Courthouse News Service vs. Michael Planet, et cetera, et al.
MS. MATTEO-BOEHM:

5

6

Calling calendar item ten, CV-11-8083,

Rachel Matteo-Boehm appearing on

10:59

behalf of plaintiff Courthouse News Service.

7

MR. GREEN:

David Green for Courthouse News Service.

8

MR. NAEVE:

Robert Naeve and Erica Reilley on behalf

9

of the defendants.
THE COURT:

10
11

Counsel, anything to add to the documents

10:59

which have been filed?
MS. MATTEO-BOEHM:

12

Your Honor, just a very brief

13

point in response to the reply filed in support of defendant's

14

motion to dismiss.

15

Defendant complains that Courthouse News Service is

16

seeking special access.

17

simply an end to the delays in access to newly filed complaints

18

caused by the defendant's policy of not permitting access until

19

after he's completed all of those administrative tasks

20

associated with those documents.

21

That's not correct.

11 :00

We're seeking

11 :00

But it's worth pointing out that in the Richmond

22

Newspapers

23

the context of courtroom proceedings, there's limited seating;

24

it's appropriate to give some of that seating to the press.

25

For the same reason, as many courts currently do, it's

Monday, November

case, the U.S. Supreme Court recognized, Look, in

28, 2011

11: 00

COURTHOUSE NEWS vs. PLANET

ER6

C~se 2: 11-cv-08083-R -MAN

Document 44

Filed 01/04/12

Page 5 of 10 Page 10 #:950
5

1

appropriate to set special procedures for members of the press

2

who visit the court every day for the expressed purpose of

3

reviewing newly filed complaints.

4

alternatives to restricting access that should be considered in

5

the third part of the First Amendment test.

Indeed, this is one of the

11: 01

6

THE COURT:

All right.

7

MR. NAEVE:

Our only point was that the

8

First Amendment doesn't grant special access and that the

9

access offered to the public has been offered to CNS.

10

But

other than that, we stand on our papers, Your Honor.

11

THE COURT:

11:01

Both plaintiff and defendant agree that

12

the Eleventh Amendment bars plaintiff's third cause of action.

13

As such, plaintiff's

14

third cause of action is dismissed.

As for plaintiff's first and second causes of action,

15

the Court concludes that abstention is appropriate under both

16

the O'Shea doctrine and the Pullman doctrine.

17

doctrine, first articulated in O'Shea vs. Littleton, 414 U.S.

18

488, 1974, counsels federal courts to decline to exercise their

19

equitable powers in cases seeking to reform state institutions.

20

Horne vs. Flores, 129 S.Ct. 2579, 2009.

21

are heightened when a federal decree has the effect of

22

dictating state and local budget priorities."

23

11: 01

The abstention

"Federalism concerns

11: 02

In E.T. v. Cantil-Sakauye, 657 F.3d 902, Ninth

24

Circuit 2011, the Ninth Circuit recently noted that O'Shea's

25

equitable restrain considerations are nearly absolute when the

Monday,

November 28, 2011

COURTHOUSE

11 :02

NEWS vs. PLANET

ER 7

C§se 2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN Document 44

Filed 01/04/12

Page 6 of 10 Page 10 #:951
6

1

state agency in question is a state court.

2

CNS seeks for would interfere with the administration of the

3

Ventura Superior Court's operations.

4

Office would be required to make all new complaints available

5

the same day they were filed.

6

judicial proceedings to evaluate the constitutionality

7

delay.

8
9

Here, the relief

The Ventura Clerk's

Failure to do so would require

11:02

of each

This would be a potentially significant disruption of
the court's operations, and could possibly lead to a

10

significant reallocation of court services.

11

hesitates to dictate state and local budget priorities.

12

and local governments have limited funds.

13

orders that money be appropriated

14

is often to take funds away from other important programs.

15

decision about how to allocate resources is better left to the

16

elected representa tives .

17

This Court

11: 03

State

When a federal court

for one program, the effect
The
11:03

Under the Pullman doctrine, first articulated in

18

Railroad Commission of Texas vs. Pullman Company, 312 U.S. 496,

19

1941, "federal courts should abstain from decision when

20

difficult and unsettled questions of state law must be resolved

21

before a substantial federal constitutional question can be

22

decided."

23

1984.

24

25

Hawaii Housing Authority vs. Midkiff,

11:03

467 U.S. 229,

In the Ninth Circuit, federal courts have the
discretion to abstain under Pullman when:

Monday, November

28, 2011

(1) the complaint

COURTHOUSE

11 :04

NEWS vs. PLANET

ERa

~se

2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN Document44

Filed 01/04/12

Page 7 of 10 Page 10 #:952
7

1

touches a sensitive area of social policy upon which federal

2

courts ought not enter unless no alternative is available;

3

a determination of the state ground is capable of resolving the

4

controversy; and, (3) the proper resolution of the state ground

5

for the decision is uncertain.

6

447 F.3d 673, Ninth Circuit 2006.

7

(2)

Smelt vs. County of Orange,

Here, all three factors are present.

11 :04

First, the

8

complaint touches a sensitive area of social policy.

9

CNS is

asking the Court to direct and oversee administrative

10

operations of the Ventura Superior Court, a potentially

11

sensitive area of state sovereignty.

12

prongs are also present.

13

already provides that court records of all types shall be made

14

reasonably accessible to all members of the public.

15

the term "reasonable access" has not yet been defined by either

16

the state courts or the California legislature.

17

access were defined to mean "same-day access," this would avoid

18

the necessity of this Court deciding the federal constitutional

19

issues, a determination that may be premature at this time.

20

Thus, defendant's motion to abstain is granted.

21
22

11:04

The second and third

Cal. Government Code

§

68150(1)

However,
11:05

If reasonable

11: 05

Under those certain circumstances, the preliminary
injunction is therefore denied.

23

Counsel to prepare the order.

24

MR. NAEVE:

25

Thank you, Your Honor.

(Proceedings concluded.)

Monday, November

28, 2011

COURTHOUSE

NEWS vs. PLANET

ERg

c~Qe2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN

Document 44

Filed 01/04/12

Page 8 of 10 Page 10 #:953
8

1

2
3

CERTIFICATE

4
5
6
7

I hereby certify that pursuant to section 753, title 28, United
states Code, the foregoing is a true and correct transcript of
the stenographically reported proceedings held in the aboveentitled matter and that the transcript page format is in
conformance with the regulations of the Judicial Conference of
the United States.

8

9
10

/S/ Theresa A. Lanza
CSR, RPR
Federal Official Court Reporter

Date

11
12
13
14
15
16
17

18
19
20
21
22
23

24
25

Monday, November

28, 2011

COURTHOUSE NEWS vs. PLANET

ER10

cJs"b 2:11-cv-08083-R
1

-MAN Document 44

6:2

Clerk's

administrative

[2J-

4:19; 7:9

Filed 01/04/12

[lJ - 6:3

delaYS[l[ - 4:17

- 6:1

Code[II-7:12

10:59 [lJ - 4:1

agree [I] - 5: 11

Commission

12911J - 5:20

al[ll-

allocate

4:4

1974 [1J- 5:18

alternative

1984[lJ - 6:23

alternat[ves

tu - 5:4

Amendment

[31-

2

5:5,8,12

2[lJ -7:2

[II - 4:5

appropriate

4:1; 5:24

[1J-

257911J - 5:20

articulated

28 I1J- 4:1

(2)- 5:17;

6:17

3

11]- 4:20

Authority

I1J- 6:22

available

[2J- 6:4;

7:2

311J-7:4

direct [lJ - 7: 9
discretion

7:8
[31-

dismissed

[IJ - 4:19
ltl - 5:20
III - 7:25

concludes

I1J- 5:15

behalf 12]- 4:6, 8
better I1J- 6: 15

488 I1J- 5:18

BOEHM [21- 4:5, 12

496 [1J- 6:18

Boehm

I1J- 4:5

briefllJ

- 4:12

budget

(21- 5:22;

6

considered

constitutionality

I1J

111-7:4

12i- 4:10;

657 I1J- 5:23

Court 16J 4:22;
5:15; 6:10; 7:9,18
court 15J 5:2; 6: 1,
10,12;

courts

68150(111J-7:12

16J 4:25;
-

Californial2J

- 4:1;

cantil

casellJ

A.Mll)-4:1
absolute

11J 5:25
-

I1J-

(1J- 7:3

[IJ - 5:14
[I) - 7:21

certain

access

4:16-18;

decline

5:4,8-9;

7:15, 17

accesslble(1)action

Circuit
7:14

13J 5:12
-

administration

(1)-

[I) - 5:18

exercise

L

I1J- 5: 18
[IJ - 5:2

law I1J- 6:20
lead I1J- 6:9
leftllJ - 6:15

F

legislature

11J 7:16
-

limited

4:23;

[2] -

6:12

factors I1J- 7:7

Littleton

failure I1J- 6:5

local13J - 5:22; 6: 11

federal IS]- 5:18, 21;
6:12,19,21,24;

7:1,

[IJ -

Look III - 4:22
Los I1J- 4:1

I1J- 5:20

M

Firstl2J - 5:5, 8

MATIEOI2J-4:5,12
MaUeo I1J- 4:5
MATIEO-BOEHM

6:17; 7:7

(2]-4:5,12
MaUeo-Boehm

funds(2)-6:12,14

13J
-

7:20

mean [1J- 7:17

G

[II - 4:9

delay [11- 6:7

Case Name/number

12J 5: 1;
-

7:14
governmentllJ

-

7:12

[2J- 7:15, 17

I1J-

4:5
members

defendants
defined

I1J- 5:17

firstI4J-5:14,17;

[2J- 4:15;

defendant's
4:13,18;

CLERK II) - 4:3

et[2J - 4:4
evaluate II] - 6:6

Flores [IJ - 5:20

defendant

6:24; 7:6
7:21

add [IJ - 4:10

Judicial [IJ - 6:6

Erica IIi - 4:8

5:11

[4J- 5:24;

circumstances

25

decree I1J- 5:21

cetera I1J- 4:4

(9) -

13J 6:15,
-

19; 7:5

[IJ - 4:18

[2)- 5: 15

111-7:18

decision

cases II) - 5:19

abstention

I1J- 6:22

deciding

- 4:22

causes

25; 7:20

[2]- 5: 19,

17; 5:3; 6:5

David I1J- 4:7
decided

caused

abstalnjat -6:19,

J

enterrlJ - 7:2

filed 15J 4:11, 13,
-

5:23
capable

item III - 4:3

end 11J 4:17
-

federalism

I1J- 5:23

Cantil-Sakauye

A

[1J- 6:2

issues I1J- 7:19

18

0

7:16
902 I1J- 5:23

(1)- 4:23

CV-11-808311J - 4:3

- 4:3

Eleventh I1J- 5:12

14J 4:4,
-

5:18; 6:19, 24; 7:2, 16

Cal I1J- 7:12
calendaf[l]

elected II] - 6: 16

[1)-

5:19
Interfere

F.3d [2J- 5:23; 7:6

courtroom

(1)- 7:22

Institutions

-7:15

[1]- 6:3

6-7,15

I1J- 6: 14

indeed [I] - 5:3

I1J- 6:9

Court's

[IJ - 6:22

I

effect (2)- 5:21; 6:13

expressed

7:13

court's

C

9

I1J- 5: 18

5:20

Housing

injunction

equitable

[1J- 7:5

Hornetn-

Important

eitherllJ
4:23

[1)- 5:21
[1J- 6: 11

[2] -

E.T (1)- 5:23

Courthouse

67311J - 7:6

documents

(2)-

- 6:6

hesitates

4:10,20

II) - 5:4

6:21; 7:18

County

6:11

(41- 5: 16;

E

counsels

467 I1J- 6:22

doctrine

Hawaii [lJ - 6:22
heightened

6:17

I1J-

7:23

447111 -7:6

[1)- 6:8

5:25

correctnj- 4:16

bars n] - 5:12

[II - 5: 13

disruption

completed

counsel

41411]- 5:17

(1)- 6:25

dismiss 111 4:14
-

controversy

B

4

H

[IJ - 5:22

[11- 4: 15

context[ll-

avold[1J - 7:17

312 (1)- 6:18

[21- 7:3

[I) - 6 :20

[21- 6:25;

constitutional

associated

difficult

complaint

considerations

area 13J 7:1, 8, 11
-

ground

complains

concluded

appropriated
6:13

229 I1J- 6:22

- 6:18

[1]- 7:20

m - 6:11

dictating

CompanYllJ

concerns

[3] -

4:24; 5:1,15

2009 [IJ - 5:20

dictate

4:17; 5:3; 6:4

[II - 4:1

appearing

2006(1)-7:6

[lJ -

complaints

Angeles

201112]-

[11- 7:2

Green [I] - 4:7

[2]-

7:3,19

6:18

11J 6:15
-

GREEN [1J- 4:7

detennlnation

7:8

agencY[lJ

granted

denied [I] - 7:22

CNS [3J- 5:9; 6:2;

1 [1J- 6:25

1941 [IJ - 6:19

Page 9 of 10 Page 10 #:954
1

Michael

11i- 4:4

Midklffll1

governments
6:12

II) -

- 6:22

Monday

11)- 4:1

money [1J- 6: 13

grant I1J- 5:8

date

ER 11

'\?ase 2:11-cv-08083-R

-MAN Document 44

Filed 01/04/12

Page 10 of 10 Page 10
2

#:955

motion

[2J- 4:14;

7:20

pOWerS[lJ - 5:19
preliminary

MR (4)- 4:7; 5:7;
7:24

6:17,25;

5

[1] -

7:21

unless (1)- 7:2

7:21

unsettled

premature[l)-

7:19

[1]- 6:20

S.Ct (1)- 5:20

MS[2)-4:5,12

prepare

(1)- 7:23

Sakauye (1)- 5:23

must (1)- 6:20

present

[2]- 7:7, 12

same-daY[l)

press [2]- 4:24; 5:1

seatIng (2) - 4:23

priorities

N

second[2J-5:14;

5:22;

(2) -

7:24
Naeve(1]-

4:8
5:25

necessity

[1] -

neW[l]-

7: 18

4:17; 5:3

News [41- 4:4, 6-7,
15
[1]-

4:22
Ninth (4) - 5:23; 6:24;
7:6

seeking

4:16;

(3)-

(2) -

sensitive

program

(1)- 6:13

programs

(1)- 6:14

prongs
proper

[1]- 7:4

provIdes

publlc[2J-5:9;
Pullman

7:14

14)- 5:16;

15

worth [1]- 4:21

5:1

§

shan [11- 7:13
s[gnlflcant

[2J- 6:8,

10

§(1) - 7:12

slmpIY[l)

6:17,25

5:17, 20;

7:5

W

set[l]-

(1)- 7: 13

6:18,22;

Serv[ce [4J- 4:4, 6-7,
servIces [1] - 6: 10

[lJ - 7:12

visit (1)- 5:2

(3)- 7: 1, 8,

11

4:23; 6:6

[3J- 6:3;

vs[6]-4:4;

5:19
seeks (1)- 6:2

purpose

noted (1) - 5:24
November

(1) -

proceedings

6:4

Newspapers

(1)- 5:1

7:25

nearIY[l]-

new[Y(2)-

procedures
Proceedings

Ventura
7:10

7:11

6:11
NAEVE (3)- 4:8; 5:7;

V

- 7:17

- 4:17

Smelt [11- 7:5

[11- 5:2

social [2] - 7:1,8

[1]- 4:1

sovereignty

Q

[1] -

7:11

0

special [31- 4:16;
questions

O'Shea

[2] -

O'Shea's
offered

(1)- 6:4

16

Rachel (1)- 4:5
Railroad

one (2)- 5:3; 6:13
000[1)-4:2

[11- 6:18

reallocation

[1] -

6:3,

(3) -

reason

orders

records

[11- 7:9

p

[1]- 4:13

Supreme (1)- 4:22

T

[1) - 4:22

(1)- 7: 13

reformjuReilley

7: 15

[1] - 5:24

recognized

(1)- 7:2

- 6:3;

[11- 7:14

recently

[1] - 6: 13

oversee

[2J -

reasonably

(1)- 7:5

[1]- 6:21

Super[or(2)
support

(1)- 4:25

reasonable

order [1] - 7:23

substantial
7:10

6:10

9; 7:10
Orange

- 5:10

stale [111- 5:19, 22;
6:1,11,20;7:3,11,

often (1)- 6:14

ought

R

5:9

operations

5:1,6
standnj

5: 16

(1)- 5:24
[2] -

Office

[1) - 6:20

tasks [1]- 4:19

5:19

tenjn-

m - 4:8

4:3

term 11]- 7:15

papers

relief [1) - 6:1

11)- 4:16
(2)- 4:6;
(3) -

PlanetllJ

-4:4

5: 12

point [2) - 4:13; 5:7
pointing

[lJ - 4:21

pollcYI3J-4:18;

7:1,

8
possibly

(1)- 6:9

potentiaIlY(2)7:10

requlre[l]required

6:8;

5:5

therefore

11)- 7:22

third [4) - 5:5, 12-13;
6:5

7:11

[1) - 6:4

resolution

5:11
plaintiffs

(1)-

6:16

part [1] - 5:5
plaintiff

Texas [1]- 6:18

- 4:13

representatives

rn - 5:10

permitting

test[l]-

replY[lJ

11)- 7:4

resolved

11J 6:20
-

resolving

Ihree 11J 7:7
touches

12]- 7: 1, 8

[1] - 7:3

resources
response
restrain

7:13

U

(1)- 6: 15
(1)- 4:13
11)- 5:25

restricting

[1) -

reviewing

5:4

[lJ - 5:3

Richmond[l]Rebertnj-

types[ll-

4:21
4:8

U.S[4]- 4:22; 5:17;
6:16,22
uncertain

[1) - 7:5

Under[4)-

5:15;

Case Name/number

date

ER12