Cygnus Systems, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation, et al

Filing 745

Download PDF
Cygnus Systems, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation, et al Doc. 745 Att. 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 OSBORN MALEDON, P.A. 2929 North Central Avenue, 21st Floor Phoenix, Arizona 85012-2793 Telephone: (602) 640-9000 David B. Rosenbaum, 009819 drosenbaum@omlaw.com Thomas L. Hudson, 014485 thudson@omlaw.com Sara S. Greene, 022706 sgreene@omlaw.com STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP Collier Center 201 East Washington Street Suite 1600 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-2382 David J. Bodney, 06065 dbodney@steptoe.com Karen J. Hartman-Tellez, 021121 khartman@steptoe.com Attorneys for The Inter-Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc., et al. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA MARIA M. GONZALEZ, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. STATE OF ARIZONA, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CV 06-1268-PHX-ROS (Lead) CV 06-1362-PHX-ROS CV 06-1575-PHX-ROS (CONSOLIDATED) ITCA PLAINTIFFS' STATEMENT REGARDING DISCOVERY DISPUTE This discovery dispute concerns Defendants' improper application of an Arizona statute, A.R.S. § 16-168(E) and (F), to prevent Plaintiffs from gathering precisely the type of evidence that the U.S. Supreme Court and the Ninth Circuit said must be examined in deciding the merits. That statute does not prevent Plaintiffs from (1) Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 obtaining unredacted voter registration forms rejected for lack of proof of citizenship ("the forms") and (2) actually using the forms to support their claims. Defendants have redacted from all forms the rejected applicants' country of birth (relevant to citizenship/naturalization), father's name or mother's maiden name (relevant to ethnicity), and in some cases year of birth (age).1 Defendants also assert that Plaintiffs may not use the forms to contact these applicants -- in person or in writing -- to ask, for example, whether or why they lacked the required ID. Nothing in A.R.S. § 16-168(E) or (F) requires the counties to redact the forms. Only subsection (F) even mentions redacting information from registration forms, and the pertinent language in that section applies only to "public inspection of voter registration records at the office of the county recorder," which is not at issue here. Also, subsection (F) does not require redaction if such information is sought "for election purposes." Here, Plaintiffs seek information for "election purposes" i.e., to support their claims that Proposition 200 unconstitutionally bars voters from participating in elections. Similarly, Subsection (E) does not prohibit Plaintiffs from actually using the rejected forms to develop their claims. Subsection (E) prohibits using information on voter registration forms for "commercial purpose[s]," not litigation. Moreover, information from forms may be used "for purposes relating to . . . an election," or for "any other purpose specifically authorized by law." Plaintiffs seek to use the information for litigation purposes only, to determine whether (1) Prop 200 disproportionately affects certain groups, (2) the law severely burdens voters, and (3) voters who lack the necessary ID "are actually unable to obtain the identification." (Order dated October 11, 2006, at 7) (emphasis added). 1 By redacting day and month of birth, Defendants have made it nearly impossible for Plaintiffs to eliminate duplicate forms. Also, Defendants argue that producing unredacted forms is a hardship. However, Defendants unilaterally decided to produce redacted forms, which took much more time than if they had produced unredacted forms. Defendants should be estopped from arguing a "hardship" that they created. 2 1710617 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Dated this 15th day of August, 2007. OSBORN MALEDON, P.A. By s/Sara S. Greene David B. Rosenbaum Thomas L. Hudson Sara S. Greene 2929 North Central, 21st Floor Phoenix, Arizona 85012-2793 STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP David J. Bodney Karen J. Hartman-Tellez Collier Center 201 East Washington Street, Suite 1600 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-2382 Telephone: 602-257-5212 Fax: 602-257-5299 E-mail: dbodney@steptoe.com Attorneys for The Inter-Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc., et al. LAWYERS' COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS UNDER LAW Jon Greenbaum 1401 New York Avenue, Suite 400 Washington, D.C. 20005 Telephone: 202-662-8315 Fax: (202) 628-2858 (fax) E-mail: jgreenbaum@lawyerscommittee.org Admitted pro hac vice ACLU Southern Regional Office Neil Bradley 2600 Marquis One Tower 245 Peachtree Center Avenue Atlanta, GA 30303 Telephone: 404-523-2721 Fax: 404-653-0331 E-mail: nbradley@aclu.org Admitted pro hac vice PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY FOUNDATION David Becker 2000 M Street, NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 Telephone: 202-467-4999 Fax: 202-293-2672 E-mail: dbecker@pfaw.org To apply pro hace vice 3 1710617 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 · · AARP FOUNDATION LITIGATION Daniel B. Kohrman (DC Bar No. 394064) 601 E Street, N.W., Suite A4-240 Washington DC 20049 Telephone: 202-434-2064 Fax: 202-434-6424 E-mail: dkohrman@aarp.org Admitted pro hac vice THE INTER TRIBAL COUNCIL OF ARIZONA, INC. Joe P. Sparks, No. 002383 Susan B. Montgomery, No. 020595 Sparks, Tehan & Ryley PC 7503 First St, Scottsdale AZ 85251 Telephone: 480-949-1339 Fax: 480-949-7587 ATTORNEYS FOR THE ITCA PLAINTIFFS CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE It is hereby certified that on the 15th day of August, 2007, the attached document was electronically transmitted to Kathleen Rapp, counsel for 13 County Defendants, for electronic transmittal to the Clerk's Office using the CM/ECF System for filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to the following CM/ECF Registrants: · · · · · · · · · · Barbara Anne Bailey barbara.bailey@azag.gov,barbbailey@cox.net,elizabeth.stark@azag.gov Carlos Becerra cbecerra@maldef.org,ljimenez@maldef.org Diego M Bernal Dbernal@maldef.org,ipina@maldef.org Dana Lee Bobroff dbobroff@yahoo.com David Jeremy Bodney dbodney@steptoe.com,awilmot@steptoe.com,phdctnef@steptoe.com Neil Bradley nbradley@aclu.org,koconnor@aclu.org Carrie Jane Brennan Carrie.Brennan@azag.gov,Sharon.Gorman@azag.gov,elizabeth.stark@azag.go v Brenna L Clani brennalclani@navajo.org Marvin S Cohen marvin.cohen@sackstierney.com,wendy.peterson@sackstierney.com M Colleen Connor connorc@mcao.maricopa.gov,cottrell@mcao.maricopa.gov,whiteb@mcao.mar icopa.gov Judith M Dworkin judith.dworkin@sackstierney.com,wendy.peterson@sackstierney.com Patricia Ferguson patty.ferguson@sackstierney.com 4 1710617 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Jon Marshall Greenbaum jgreenbaum@lawyerscommittee.org,sbatchelor@lawyerscommittee.org Sara S Greene sgreene@omlaw.com,ppalmer@omlaw.com,ecfdc@omlaw.com Karen J Hartman khartman@steptoe.com,phdctnef@steptoe.com,mgalvez@steptoe.com Thomas Lee Hudson thudson@omlaw.com,bwendt@omlaw.com,ecfdc@omlaw.com Daniel B Kohrman dkohrman@aarp.org Dan W Montgomery lawofdan@cs.com,bclark@thompsonkrone.com Mary Ruth O'Grady mary.ogrady@azag.gov,margaret.hoffman@azag.gov Daniel R Ortega , Jr danny@rmgmoinjurylaw.com,delia@rmgmoinjurylaw.com Lance B Payette lance.payette@co.navajo.az.us William Perry Pendley wppendley@mountainstateslegal.com Nina Perales nperales@maldef.org,cleija@maldef.org David B Rosenbaum drosenbaum@omlaw.com,kdourlein@omlaw.com,ecfdc@omlaw.com Karl J Sandstrom ksandstrom@perkinscoie.com Bruce L. Skolnik Bruce.skolnik@azag.gov, brandi.moyer@azag.gov, allan.rosenbaum@azag.gov Joe P Sparks joe-sparks@qwest.net Joel M Spector jspector@mountainstateslegal.com,stoeser@mountainstateslegal.com Jean E Wilcox jwilcox@coconino.az.gov,mrankin@coconino.az.gov Dennis Ira Wilenchik diw@wb-law.com,terryl@wb-law.com,hilarym@wb-law.com,diannap@wblaw.com,olegl@wb-law.com,kathleenr@wb-law.com 5 1710617

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.


Why Is My Information Online?