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

Filing 35

Declaration of LEE TIEN IN SUPPORT OF MOTIONS TO LODGE AND TO EXTEND PAGE LIMITS filed byGregory Hicks, Erik Knutzen, Tash Hepting, Carolyn Jewel. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A# 2 Exhibit B# 3 Exhibit C)(Kathrein, Reed) (Filed on 4/5/2006)

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

Doc. 35

1 ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION CINDY COHN (145997) 2 [e-mail] LEE TIEN (148216) 3 [e-mail] KURT OPSAHL (191303) 4 [e-mail] KEVIN S. BANKSTON (217026) 5 [e-mail] CORYNNE MCSHERRY (221504) 6 [e-mail] JAMES S. TYRE (083117) 7 [e-mail] 454 Shotwell Street 8 San Francisco, CA 94110 Telephone: [phone] (fax) 10 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 11 [Additional counsel appear on signature page.] 12 13 14

TRABER & VOORHEES BERT VOORHEES (137623) [e-mail] THERESA M. TRABER (116305) [e-mail] 128 North Fair Oaks Avenue, Suite 204 Pasadena, CA 91103 Telephone: [phone] (fax)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA No. C-06-00672-VRW CLASS ACTION DECLARATION OF LEE TIEN IN SUPPORT OF ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO EXTEND PAGE LIMIT FOR MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND TO LODGE DOCUMENTS WITH THE COURT (CIVIL LOCAL RULES 7-11, 79-5)

15 TASH HEPTING, GREGORY HICKS, ) CAROLYN JEWEL and ERIK KNUTZEN, on ) 16 Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly ) Situated, ) 17 ) Plaintiffs, ) 18 ) vs. ) 19 ) AT&T CORP., et al. ) 20 ) Defendants. ) 21 ) 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2

I, Lee Tien, hereby declare: 1. I am an attorney of record for Plaintiffs in this action and a member of good standing

3 of the California State Bar, and am admitted to practice before this Court. I have personal 4 knowledge of the matters stated in this declaration. If called upon to do so, I am competent to testify 5 to all matters set forth herein. 6 2. On Friday, March 31, 2006, Plaintiffs have their Motion for Preliminary Injunction

7 without filing the Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of the Motion and two other 8 supporting declarations and exhibits. 9 3. Plaintiffs' motion was filed without the supporting papers referenced above because

10 on Thursday, March 30, 2006, the U.S. Government, which is not a party to this action, expressed 11 concern that some of the documents might contain classified information and that lodging the 12 documents with the Court under the procedures of Civil Local Rule 79-5(d) would be inadequate to 13 protect their security. Declaration of Lee Tien, ¶¶11-12 (Dkt. 22) (Mar. 31, 2006) ("Tien Decl."). 14 4. At the Government's request, Plaintiffs provided the Government with copies of three

15 AT&T documents for the Government's review. Id. ¶¶13-14. 16 5. The Government does not object to Plaintiffs' filing the three AT&T documents with

17 the Court under seal. Ex. A (Letter of Mr. Anthony Coppolino, Special Litigation Counsel, U.S. 18 Department of Justice). 19 6. Defendants object to the filing of the AT&T documents under seal pursuant to Civil

20 Local Rule 79-5(d), without prior leave of court. Ex. B (Letter of Mr. Bruce Ericson). 21 7. Plaintiffs have responded to AT&T and asserted that they believe that the court's

22 sealing processes are sufficient to protect AT&T's interests. Ex. C (Letter of Ms. Cindy Cohn). 23 8. Accordingly, Plaintiffs have been unable to agree to a stipulation with Defendants on

24 the treatment of the AT&T documents. 25 9. Despite the requirements of Civil Local Rule 79-5(d), Plaintiffs are not lodging

26 redacted versions of any of the sealed documents being lodged with the Court in view of the unusual 27 circumstances surrounding Plaintiffs' filing, including the Government's actions with respect to the 28 AT&T documents.
DEC OF LEE TIEN IN SUPP OF ADMIN MOT TO EXT PG LIMIT FOR MOT FOR PRELIM INJUN AND TO LODGE DOCS WITH THE COURT (CIVIL L. R. 7-11, 79-5) - C-06-00672-VRW

-1-

1

10.

On Thursday, March 30, 2006, Plaintiffs also discussed a stipulation with Defendants

2 to extend the page limit to 35 pages for the Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Points and Authorities in 3 support of their Motion for Preliminary Injunction, offering to reciprocate by extending Defendants' 4 page limit for their Opposition to Plaintiffs' motion. 5 11. Defendants indicated that they did not object to such stipulation in principle, and did

6 not refuse to extend the page limit, but they also did not formally stipulate to such extension. 7 12. Defendants proposed a broader stipulation that included agreement for a 35 page

8 brief, was unacceptable to Plaintiffs in other portions. There have been no further discussions 9 between the parties on this matter. 10 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is

11 true and correct. Executed this 5th day of April, 2006, at San Francisco, California. 12 13 14 15 /s/ LEE TIEN LEE TIEN I, Reed R. Kathrein, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this

16 DECLARATION OF LEE TIEN IN SUPPORT OF ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO EXTEND 17 PAGE LIMIT FOR MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND TO LODGE 18 DOCUMENTS WITH THE COURT (CIVIL LOCAL RULES 7-11, 79-5). In compliance with 19 General Order 45, X.B., I hereby attest that Lee Tien has concurred in this filing. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
DEC OF LEE TIEN IN SUPP OF ADMIN MOT TO EXT PG LIMIT FOR MOT FOR PRELIM INJUN AND TO LODGE DOCS WITH THE COURT (CIVIL L. R. 7-11, 79-5) - C-06-00672-VRW
T:\CasesSF\AT&T Privacy\Shared_Counsel\dec00029711.doc

-2-