Petroliam Nasional Berhad v., Inc.

Filing 137

ORDER re Appendices. Signed by Judge Hamilton on 11/22/2011. (pjhlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/22/2011) Modified on 11/22/2011 (vlkS, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 7 PETROLIAM NASIONAL BERHAD, 8 Plaintiff, 9 v. ORDER GODADDY.COM, INC., 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 No. C 09-5939 PJH Defendant. _______________________________/ 12 13 The court has reviewed the documents submitted by plaintiff Petroliam Nasional 14 Berhad in support of its motion for partial summary judgment and in opposition to 15 defendant’s motion for summary judgment. In each instance, plaintiff includes a variety of 16 documents assembled into an “Appendix of Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c)(1)(A) materials.” Rule 17 56(c)(1)(A) sets forth the requirement that “[a] party asserting that a fact cannot be or is 18 genuinely disputed must support the assertion by” citing to “materials in the record.” The 19 Advisory Committee Notes to the 2010 amendments, to which plaintiff refers, state that an 20 assertion that a fact can or cannot be genuinely disputed may be supported by citation to 21 an appendix containing materials that “are in the record.” 22 A trial court can consider only admissible evidence in a ruling on a motion for 23 summary judgment; “unauthenticated documents cannot be considered in a motion for 24 summary judgment.” Orr v. Bank of America, NT & SA, 285 F.3d 764, 773 (9th Cir. 2002); 25 see also Las Vegas Sands, LLC v. Nehme, 632 F.3d 526, 532-33 (9th Cir. 2011). Here, 26 plaintiff has assembled a collection of materials, but has not identified them or provided any 27 authentication. Thus, the materials, which are not admissible in their present form, are not 28 “in the record.” 1 In addition, the materials are not presented in a form that is usable by the court. The 2 “Appendix” in support of plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment consists of more 3 than 200 pages of miscellaneous documents, and the “Appendix” in support of plaintiff’s 4 opposition to defendant’s motion for summary judgment consists of what appears to be 5 nearly 3500 pages of miscellaneous documents. These documents include deposition 6 excerpts, discovery responses, copies of web pages, e-mails, papers that were previously 7 filed in this case and related case 10-3052, and numerous other documents that the court 8 cannot even attempt to categorize. materials as evidence in support of its motion or its opposition to defendant’s motion, 11 For the Northern District of California The Appendices are STRICKEN. If plaintiff wishes the court to consider these 10 United States District Court 9 plaintiff must present them in a form that complies with the Federal Rules of Evidence. The 12 documents must also be presented in a form that is usable by the court, which means that 13 they must be attached to a supporting declaration, and must be separately tabbed. The 14 deadline for complying with this order is Friday, November 25, 2011. 15 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 Dated: November 22, 2011 ______________________________ PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON United States District Judge 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?