Glassey et al v. Microsemi Inc et al

Filing 116

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS REQUESTS FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE re 115 Request for Judicial Notice.. Signed by Judge Alsup on November 18, 2014. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/18/2014)

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
TODD S. GLASSEY and MICHAEL E. MCNEIL,

13
14
15
16
17
18
19

v.
MICROSEMI INC, US GOVERNMENT,
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, GOVERNOR BROWN,
THE IETF AND THE INTERNET SOCIETY,
APPLE INC., CISCO INC., EBAY INC.,
PAYPAL INC., GOOGLE INC., JUNIPER
NETWORKS, MICROSOFT CORP., NETFLIX INC.,
ORACLE INC., MARK HASTINGS,
ERIK VAN DER KAAY, AND THALSE GROUP,
and “UNSERVED” DOES,

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’
REQUESTS FOR JUDICIAL
NOTICE

Defendants.
/

20
21

No. C 14-03629 WHA

Plaintiffs,

12

On November 13, pro se plaintiffs Todd Glassey and Michael McNeil filed a second

22

amended complaint. On November 17, plaintiffs filed several requests for judicial notice.

23

Currently, there are no pending motions and the deadline for defendants to respond to the second

24

amended complaint has not elapsed. For the reasons stated herein, plaintiffs’ requests for judicial

25

notice are DENIED.

26

First, plaintiffs’ requests are incomplete (Dkt. Nos. 113, 114, 115). Plaintiffs failed to

27

append complete and authenticated copies of all of the relevant documents. Even though

28

plaintiffs sought judicial notice of at least seven items, plaintiffs only appended (1) a two-page
print-out of what appears to be the abstract for EP0997808 and (2) a one-page print-out in Korean

1

of what appears to be the abstract for 2000-0035093. Plaintiffs failed to append, for example,

2

copies of the “EPO report from 11-16-2014” and the “entire Case File for 13-04662 NC,”

3

including “the audio recording from the ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE hearing.”

4

Second, plaintiffs’ requests do not comply with FRE 201. For example, plaintiffs seek

5

judicial notice of the “Co-Inventor Agreement, DDI Settlement, [and] TTI Settlement.” Plaintiffs

6

also seek judicial notice of a statement allegedly made by an attorney. These are not facts that

7

can be accurately and readily determined from sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be

8

questioned.

9

Accordingly, plaintiffs’ requests for judicial notice are DENIED.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
IT IS SO ORDERED.

12
Dated: November 18, 2014.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2