Free Objection to Exhibit List - District Court of Federal Claims - federal


File Size: 23.3 kB
Pages: 2
Date: February 26, 2008
File Format: PDF
State: federal
Category: District
Author: unknown
Word Count: 348 Words, 2,216 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cofc/7712/316.pdf

Download Objection to Exhibit List - District Court of Federal Claims ( 23.3 kB)


Preview Objection to Exhibit List - District Court of Federal Claims
Case 1:92-cv-00580-EJD

Document 316

Filed 02/26/2008

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS ______________________________ SPARTON CORPORATION, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 92-580C ) Chief Judge Edward Damich THE UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendant. ) SPARTON CORPORATION'S OBJECTION TO NEW EXHIBIT D242 Sparton Corporation ("Sparton"), in compliance with the Court's February 20, 2008 Order, paragraph (7), (Doc. 312), files its objection to defendant's new exhibit D242. the February 20, 2008 pretrial conference, defendant indicated that it wished to present a new exhibit, SPA 43745. Defendant did not indicate that it desired to offer During

a fifteen page excerpted exhibit which begins with SPA 43745 but includes SPA 43746-53 and 43763-68. Thus, D242.1-.15 First, D242.1-

corresponds with SPA 43745-53 and 43763-68.

.15 is a Sparton document that was produced to defendant in the early 1990s, over 10 years ago. is incomplete. The exhibit D242.1-.15

The document actually begins with SPA 43745 If the Court grants defendant the

and extends to SPA 43812.

privilege of offering this documentary exhibit, defendant should be required to introduce the entire document in evidence. Secondly, the exhibit is irrelevant, hearsay and

is probably encompassed by the Federal Circuit's earlier opinion in this case. It certainly was not identified by

1

Case 1:92-cv-00580-EJD

Document 316

Filed 02/26/2008

Page 2 of 2

defendant (in interrogatory answer) or its experts (in their reports) in this case. The document purports to be an Nevertheless, it is

unsolicited proposal by Sparton.

unknown whether such a proposal was actually made by Sparton or received by the Navy. Discovery is over. Its author is also unknown.

Merely because one of defendant's

attorneys is reviewing Sparton's documents and thought this document may be relevant to this case is insufficient justification for permitting its entry into defendant's document list. Respectfully submitted, Sparton Corporation, Plaintiff Dated: February 26, 2008 s/Steven Kreiss Steven Kreiss Attorney for Plaintiff 1120 Connecticut Avenue NW Suite 433 Washington D.C. 20036 Telephone: (202) 347-6382 Facsimile: (202) 347-7711

2