Gilman v. Fisher, et al

Filing 373

ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 9/26/2011 ORDERING that the Court's 370 Order granting Pltfs three additional weeks to submit the Rutherford data, is VACATED. Within 7 days, Pltfs shall submit to the Court a disk containing the evidence presented at the evidentiary hearing. Pltfs are not required to submit the raw Rutherford data. (Zignago, K.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
RICHARD M. GILMAN, et al.,
10
NO. CIV. S-05-830 LKK/GGH
11
12

Plaintiffs,
v.
O R D E R

13

EDMUND J. BROWN, et al.,

14
Defendants.
15

/

16

On August 31, 2011 this court issued an order appointing

17

Professor Richard Berk as a neutral expert witness pursuant to FRE

18

706. ECF No. 365. The order also required plaintiffs to submit to

19

the court, within fourteen days of the issuance of the order, an

20

electronic version of “all evidence presented in the

21

evidentiary hearing, all data underlying the summaries and other

22

analyses presented at the hearing, and all data obtained to date

23

from the Rutherford class action and concerning implementation of

24

the advanced hearing process.” August 31, 2011 Order 4:10-14.

25

On September 12, 2011, plaintiffs submitted a response to the

26

August 31, 2011 order. ECF No. 368. In their response, plaintiffs
1

1

stated that the evidence presented at the evidentiary hearing has

2

already been submitted to the court, obviating, according to

3

plaintiffs, the need to comply with this court's August 31, 2011

4

order which specified that plaintiffs submit to the court, in

5

electronic format, the evidence presented at the evidentiary

6

hearing. Plaintiffs submitted a disk containing Executive Reports

7

on Parol Review Decisions, which Ms. Knox relied on in preparing

8

her charts and summaries. Plaintiffs stated that the submission of

9

the raw data was “complicated.” Plaintiffs requested that their

10

September 12 submission be deemed to comply with the August 31,

11

2011 order.

12

At a telephone conference with the parties, the court granted

13

plaintiffs an additional three weeks to obtain the raw “Rutherford”

14

data. ECF No. 370. Upon further consultation with Professor Berk

15

and with the parties, the court orders as follows:

16

[1] The court’s order granting plaintiffs three additional

17

weeks to submit the Rutherford data, ECF No. 370 is VACATED.

18

[2] Plaintiffs SHALL, within seven (7) days of the issuance

19

of this order, submit to the court a disk containing the

20

evidence presented at the evidentiary hearing.

21

[3] Plaintiffs are not required to submit the raw Rutherford

22

data. Instead, Professor Berk SHALL contact Thomas Master

23

directly

24

Professor

25

describing the data set that he obtains from Mr. Master, or

26

any searches that he requests Mr. Master to perform.

to

obtain

Berk

will

the

data.

submit

2

a

Upon

obtaining

declaration

to

the

data,

the

court

1

IT IS SO ORDERED.

2

DATED:

September 26, 2011.

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
3