CELORIO v. GOOGLE INC et al

Filing 132

ORDER re Plaintiff's 129 MOTION for Leave to Supplement 109 MOTION for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. Exhibits attached to 129 Motion shall be deemed filed as part of Pla's 109 Motion. Plaintiff may file affidavits or other materials to demonstrate admissibility of these exhibits. If filed, Def may file response w/7 days of date of service of such additional affidavits.(Affidavits or Other Materials Deadline due by 1/7/2013.). Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE GARY R JONES on 12/19/2012. (jws)

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
GAINESVILLE DIVISION

VICTOR MANUEL CELORIO,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 1:11-cv-79-SPM-GRJ

GOOGLE INC., et al.,
Defendants.
/
ORDER
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion To Supplement Exhibits in
Plaintiff’s Motion For Summary Judgment. (Doc. 129.) Defendant Google, Inc. has filed
an opposition to the motion (Doc. 130) and therefore the motion is ripe for review.
Plaintiff requests permission to supplement his motion for summary judgment by
filing exhibits CCC, DDD, and EEE, as supplements to exhibits F, K, and BBB filed with
Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. The exhibits, which Plaintiff seeks to file,
consist of three web pages concerning the Espresso Book Machine and several
newspaper web pages. Defendant Google objects on the grounds that the evidence
Plaintiff now wishes to submit is not admissible and therefore should not be considered
on summary judgment.
Without detailing the many evidentiary hurdles a litigant must comply with when
web pages are filed to support or oppose a motion for summary judgment (i.e.
authenticity, hearsay, etc.)1 these issues are more properly addressed by the Court

1

See, e.g. Lorraine v. Markel American Ins. Co., 241 F.R.D. 534, 554 (D. Md. 2007)(counsel
attem pting to authenticate exhibits containing inform ation from internet websites need to address a
num ber of concerns including what was actually on the website; does the exhibit accurately reflect it; and if
so, is it attributable to the owner of the site).

Page 2 of 2

when ruling on the motion for summary judgment rather than when ruling on a motion
for leave to supplement. The Court will, therefore, grant Plaintiff leave to supplement
the record with the exhibits attached to his motion. The Court will leave for another day
the issue of whether any of these exhibits should be considered by the Court from an
evidentiary standpoint in resolving the pending motions for summary judgment.
So that the Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, will have an opportunity to
address any evidentiary problems, the Court will permit Plaintiff to supplement the
record with any affidavits or other matters he deems necessary to demonstrate a
foundation for the admissibility of these exhibits. Any such materials must be filed by
January 7, 2013. In the event Plaintiff files any further materials to demonstrate the
admissibility of these exhibits, Defendant may file a response within seven days of the
date of service of any such filings. No further briefing or filing will be permitted.
Accordingly, upon due consideration, it is ORDERED:
1. Plaintiff’s Motion To Supplement Exhibits in Plaintiff’s Motion For Summary
Judgment. (Doc. 129) is GRANTED. The exhibits attached to Plaintiff’s motion
shall be deemed filed as part of Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.
2. Plaintiff may file affidavits or other materials by January 7, 2013 to
demonstrate the admissibility of these exhibits. In the event Plaintiff files any
affidavits to demonstrate the admissibility of these exhibits, Defendant may file a
response within seven days of the date of service of such additional materials
addressing the issue of the admissibility of these exhibits.
DONE AND ORDERED this 19th day of December 2012.

s/ Gary R. Jones
GARY R. JONES
United States Magistrate Judge

Case No: 1:11-cv-79-SPM -GRJ