Hepting et al v. AT&T Corp. et al

Filing 339

Minute Entry: Further Case Management Conference and hearing on Defendant AT&T and USA's motion to stay pending appeal held on 8/8/2006. The court determined that it would not, at this stage, appoint a technical advisor or expert witness and that it would issue a stay of limited duration. (Court Reporter Sahar McVickar.) (cgd, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 8/8/2006)

Hepting et al v. AT&T Corp. et al

Doc. 339

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTE ORDER VAUGHN R. WALKER United States District Chief Judge DATE: August 8, 2006 COURTROOM DEPUTY: Cora Delfin CASE NO. C- 06-0672 VRW TITLE: Tash Hepting et al v. AT&T Corporation et al COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF: COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT: Cindy Cohn, James Tyre Bruce Ericson, Bradford Berenson Kevin Bankston, Robert Fram David Anderson, Marc Axelbaum Kurt Opshall USA: Anthony Coppolino Wired News, CondeNet Inc: Timothy Alger AP, San Jose Mercury News et al: Karl Olson PROCEEDINGS: 1. Further CMC 2. AT&T and United States' Motion for a Stay Pending Appeal RESULTS: The parties apprised the court regarding the status of the interlocutory appeal motions of the government and AT&T. The court asked the government to describe how it will ensure that any classified documents the court reviewed would be available to the Ninth Circuit in case of appellate review. The court heard argument from counsel regarding: (1) whether the court should appoint a technical advisor or expert witness pursuant to FRE 706 and (2) whether the court should stay the proceedings pending the decision of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation and/or the interlocutory appeal before the Ninth Circuit; and if granted, what part of the proceedings should be stayed. The court determined that it would not, at this stage, appoint a technical advisor or expert witness and that it would issue a stay of limited duration. Court Reporter: Sahar McVickar

Dockets.Justia.com