Ibrahim v. Department of Homeland et al

Filing 497

ORDER RE DEPOSITION OATH re 493 Letter filed by Rahinah Ibrahim. Signed by Judge Alsup on July 2, 2013.. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/2/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 RAHINAH IBRAHIM, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 16 No. C 06-00545 WHA v. ORDER RE DEPOSITION OATH DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, et al., Defendants. / 17 18 According to plaintiff, the parties dispute whether plaintiff’s July 5 deposition testimony 19 will be admissible at trial if the oath is administered by a United Kingdom notary public instead 20 of a United States consular officer (Dkt. No. 493). The government responds that it has not yet 21 made its objection; rather, it merely reserves the right to object to the admissibility of the 22 deposition testimony and to the weight it should be accorded if the oath is not administered by a 23 consular officer (Dkt. No. 496). 24 If the parties cannot stipulate to the officer administering the oath and its effect on 25 admissibility before the deposition begins, then the Court recommends that the deposition not go 26 forward until the issue can be properly briefed in detail by both sides. Without the benefit of 27 proper briefing, the Court is unable to advise counsel as to admissibility. If counsel do go 28 1 forward with the deposition, it must be at the peril of both sides. It was unreasonable to present 2 this issue to the Court on Friday evening and expect the Court to research this issue on its own 3 and then give an advisory opinion. 4 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 7 Dated: July 2, 2013. WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 8 9 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?