Ceglia v. Zuckerberg et al

Filing 179

DECLARATION signed by Dean Boland re 176 Response in Opposition to Motion, 177 Memorandum in Opposition to Motion, 178 Affidavit in Support of Motion filed by Paul D. Ceglia. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Boland, Dean)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
PAUL D. CEGLIA,

Civil Action No. : 1:10-cv-00569-RJA

Plaintiff,
v.
MARK ELLIOT ZUCKERBERG, Individually, and
FACEBOOK, INC.

DECLARATION
OF DEAN BOLAND REGARDING
DESCRIPTION OF PRIVILEGED
MATERIAL IN ACCORDANCE
WITH FED.R.CIV.P. 26(b)(5)(A)
(ii)

Defendants.
DEAN BOLAND submits this declaration in compliance with Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 26(b)(5)(A)(ii) and hereby declare under penalty of perjury and
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746 that the following i. true and correct:
1.

I am counsel for Paul D. Ceglia

2.

I filed a notice of appearance as counsel for Paul D. Ceglia in this matter on
Friday, October 21, 2011.

3.

I am aware that two privilege logs, Doc. No. 156-2 and Doc. No. 156-4 were
previously submitted by Plaintiff to Defendants.

4.

As of Tuesday, October 26, 2011, Plaintiff has represented to the court and to
Defendants that the privilege log, Doc. No. 156-2, was revised to reflect an
assertion of privilege as to only one document. See, Exhibit A.

5.

As of Tuesday, October 26, 2011, Plaintiff has represented to the court and to
Defendants that the privilege log, Doc. No. 156-4, was revised to reflect an

1

assertion of privilege as to only one document. Exhibit B.
6.

At the court’s direction, I submitted both documents to the court for in camera
review considering Plaintiff’s claim of privilege as to each one item in each
privilege log.

7.

In compliance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(5)(A)(ii), I described the nature of the
document not being disclosed in Exhibit A enabling Defendants to assess
Plaintiff’s privilege claim without revealing information that was itself
privileged or protected.
a.

That description in pertinent part is as follows:
i.

Work Product Privilege/Attorney-client Privilege (N.Y. C.P.L.R. 4503).
Attorney client communication and attorney analysis derived from that
communication along with strategy considerations and an analysis of
facts in this case used in the past by Mr. Ceglia for consideration of
retention of additional counsel.

8.

In compliance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(5)(A)(ii), I described the nature of the
document not being disclosed in Exhibit B enabling Defendants to assess
Plaintiff’s privilege claim without revealing information that was itself
privileged or protected.
a.

That description in pertinent part is as follows:
i.

329 is an attachment to an email which is the image captured of a one
page communication between Mr. Ceglia and an attorney. The nature of
the communication is that Mr. Ceglia is seeking legal advice from that
2

attorney.
9.

Additional factual arguments regarding the assertion of privilege involving the
sole document for which privilege was asserted in Exhibit B are contained in
Plaintiff’s memorandum, Doc. No. 177.
I hereby and hereby declare under penalty of perjury and pursuant to 28

U.S.C. 1746 that the following is true and correct:
DATED: October 26, 2011.

/s/ Dean Boland
Dean Boland
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
A copy of the foregoing shall be served on all parties on October 26, 2011 by
operation of the court’s electronic case filing system.

/s/ Dean Boland
Dean Boland

3