Petroliam Nasional Berhad v. GoDaddy.com, 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).
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?