Pecover et al v. Electronic Arts Inc.

Filing 187

ORDER (Filed on 8/5/2010).

Pecover et al v. Electronic Arts Inc.

Doc. 187

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 GEOFFREY PECOVER and JEFFREY LAWRENCE, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v ELECTRONIC ARTS INC, a Delaware Corporation, Defendant. / No C 08-2820 VRW ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

On April 1, 2010, plaintiffs filed a redacted motion to exclude the opinions of defendants' expert, Jill Hamburger. #130. Doc

In conjunction with their submission, plaintiffs provided At the court's

the court with an unredacted copy under seal.

request on August 4, 2010, plaintiffs furnished the court with a "duplicate" copy of the April 1 document submitted under seal. Upon inspection, however, the August 4 document appears to be different from its April 1 sibling. Contrast, for example, April 1

document at 1 ln 2-8 with August 4 document at 1 ln 2-7. \\

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

In light of this apparent discrepancy, plaintiffs are ORDERED to submit to the court, on or before August 6, 2010 at 3:00 PM, a memorandum explaining the reason(s) for the apparent differences between the August 4 and April 1 under seal documents. Plaintiffs submission shall be accompanied by a red-line version of the April 1 document indicating all differences between it and its August 4 counterpart.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

VAUGHN R WALKER United States District Chief Judge

2