AMERICAN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION, INC. et al v. PUBLIC.RESOURCE.ORG, INC.

Filing 103

Unopposed MOTION for Leave to File Corrected Documents by PUBLIC.RESOURCE.ORG, INC. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order Granting Defendant's Unopposed Motion for Leave to File Corrected Documents, #2 Exhibit 1 [Redacted Version] of Memorandum of Points and Authorities In Support of Defendant Public Resource's Motion for Summary Judgment and Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment and Permanent Injunction, #3 Exhibit 2 [Redacted Version] of Statement of Material Facts In Support of Defendant Public Resource's Motion for Summary Judgment and Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment and Permanent Injunction, #4 Exhibit 3 [Redacted Version] of Statement of Disputed Facts In Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment and Permanent Injunction, #5 Exhibit 4 Table of Corrections)(Becker, Matthew)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

AMERICAN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
ASSOCIATION, INC., AMERICAN
PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION, INC., and
NATIONAL COUNCIL ON MEASUREMENT IN
EDUCATION, INC.,

Case No. 1:14-CV-00857-TSC-DAR
DEFENDANT-COUNTERCLAIMANT
PUBLIC.RESOURCE.ORG, INC.’S
UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE
TO FILE CORRECTED DOCUMENTS

Plaintiffs,
Action Filed: May 23, 2014
v.
PUBLIC.RESOURCE.ORG,
Defendant.

Defendant-Counterclaimant Public.Resource.Org, Inc. (“Public Resource”) moves, with
Plaintiffs’ consent, for leave to file corrected versions of three documents that were originally
submitted with Public Resource’s Motion for Summary Judgment:
(1) the Memorandum of Points and Authorities In Support of Defendant-Counterclaimant
Public.Resource.Org’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Opposition to Plaintiffs’
Motion for Summary Judgment and Permanent Injunction (ECF Nos. 68-2 (under seal)
and 69-1 (redacted)),
(2) the Statement of Material Facts In Support of Defendant-Counterclaimant
Public.Resource.Org, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Opposition to Plaintiffs’
Motion for Summary Judgment and Permanent Injunction (ECF Nos. 68-3 (under seal)
and 69-2 (redacted)), and
(3) Defendant-Counterclaimant Public.Resource.Org, Inc.’s Statement of Disputed Facts
In Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment and Permanent Injunction
(ECF Nos. 68-4 (under seal) and 69-3 (redacted)).
POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION
In support of this motion, Public Resource states as follows:
1.

On January 21, 2016, Public Resource filed its Motion for Summary Judgment

1

and Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment, including both under seal (ECF
No. 68) and public redacted versions (ECF No. 69). Among the documents filed were the
Memorandum of Points and Authorities In Support of Defendant-Counterclaimant
Public.Resource.Org’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for
Summary Judgment and Permanent Injunction (ECF Nos. 68-2 and 69-1), the Statement of
Material Facts In Support of Defendant-Counterclaimant Public.Resource.Org, Inc.’s Motion for
Summary Judgment and Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment and Permanent
Injunction (ECF Nos. 68-3 and 69-2), and Defendant-Counterclaimant Public.Resource.Org,
Inc.’s Statement of Disputed Facts In Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment
and Permanent Injunction (ECF Nos. 68-4 and 69-3).
2.

Recently, Public Resource discovered instances within these three documents of

numbering discrepancies in the citations to Public Resource’s Statement of Material Facts
(“SMF”) or Index of Consolidated Exhibits (“ICE”), causing the citation to point to the incorrect
paragraph or exhibit.
3.

To assist this Court’s adjudication of the parties’ cross-motions for summary

judgment, Public Resource submits with this motion corrected versions of these documents, as
well as a table listing the corrections that were made. The public-redacted versions of the
proposed corrected documents are included as Exhibits 1, 2, and 3, the table listing the
corrections is attached as Exhibit 4, and the un-redacted versions of the proposed corrected
documents are filed separately with a motion to file under seal. The only changes to the corrected
versions of the documents are corrections to the citations to the SMF or ICE; no substantive
changes have been made to the submitted documents.
4.

Plaintiffs’ counsel confirmed that Plaintiffs do not oppose this corrective filing.

2

WHEREFORE, Public Resource requests that the Court enter an Order granting it leave
to file the attached corrected documents.

Dated: March 15, 2016

Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Matthew Becker
Andrew P. Bridges (admitted)
[e-mail]
Sebastian E. Kaplan (admitted pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
Matthew Becker (admitted pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
FENWICK & WEST LLP
555 California Street, 12th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Corynne McSherry (admitted pro hac vice)
[e-mail]
Mitchell L. Stoltz (D.C. Bar No. 978149)
[e-mail]
ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION
815 Eddy Street
San Francisco, CA 94109
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
David Halperin (D.C. Bar No. 426078)
[e-mail]
1530 P Street NW
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant-Counterclaimant
Public.Resource.Org, Inc.

3