Free Motion for Miscellaneous Relief - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:00-cv-00697-JFM

Document 362

Filed 10/15/2007

Page 1 of 9

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 00-697C (Senior Judge Merow)

DEFENDANT'S MOTION SEEKING LEAVE TO FILE OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S TESTIMONY DESIGNATIONS FOR MR. THOMAS POLLOG AND DEFENDANT'S COUNTER-DESIGNATIONS Defendant, the United States, respectfully seeks leave to file its objections to the testimony designated by plaintiff, Wisconsin Electric Power Company ("WEPCO"), for Mr. Thomas Pollog and its counter-designations of testimony for Mr. Pollog. By motion filed February 9, 2007, the Government asked the Court to strike the testimony designated by WEPCO for Mr. Pollog and others, in part, because Mr. Pollog was expected to testify at trial. In the alternative, we sought leave to file our objections to WEPCO's designations at a later date. In response to our motion, the Court ruled that WEPCO could not seek to designate the testimony of individuals scheduled to testify. Order, Wisconsin Electric Power Co. v. United States, No. 00-697C (Fed. Cl.), Aug. 16, 2007, at 23. As the Court is aware, Mr. Pollog did not testify at trial. For this reason, we expect that WEPCO will seek admission of the prior testimony it has designated for Mr. Pollog. We request that the Court consider the Government's objections to the testimony designated and, if the testimony is admitted, consider also the testimony that the Government has counter-designated. The Government's objections and counter-designations are attached.

Case 1:00-cv-00697-JFM

Document 362

Filed 10/15/2007

Page 2 of 9

For the foregoing reasons, the Government requests that it be allowed to file its objections to the testimony designated by WEPCO for Mr. Pollog and its counter-designations. Respectfully submitted, PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General JEANNE E. DAVIDSON Director

s/ Harold D. Lester, Jr. HAROLD D. LESTER, JR. Assistant Director

OF COUNSEL: JANE K. TAYLOR Office of General Counsel U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Ave., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20585

s/ Sharon A. Snyder SHARON A. SNYDER Trial Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Department of Justice Attn: Classification Unit 8th Floor 1100 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20530 Phone: (202) 305-9640 Fax: (202) 307-2503 Attorneys for Defendant

October 15, 2007

2

Case 1:00-cv-00697-JFM

Document 362

Filed 10/15/2007

Page 3 of 9

ATTACHMENT

Case 1:00-cv-00697-JFM

Document 362

Filed 10/15/2007

Page 4 of 9

THOMAS POLLOG Objections: Designation April 11, 2002 96:5-97:17 8:12-15:11 27:10-28:9 44:20-45:25 49:25-51:2 54:11-56:16 71:17-71:21 74:12-78:15 93:10-96:25 99:6-100:19 102:19-103:12 104:25-105:6 110:5-16 110:24-111:12 113:21-115:15 117:3-119:4 121:13-20 122:25-123:2 124:21-125:8 126:1-15 132:1-17 Foundation, vague Hearsay, vague Foundation, best evidence Best evidence, vague Legal conclusion, vague Legal conclusion, vague Best evidence, vague Best evidence Best evidence Vague Best evidence Best evidence Best evidence Vague, completeness Best evidence, vague Best evidence, vague Foundation, vague, completeness Best evidence, vague Best evidence, vague Best evidence, vague Best evidence, vague 1 Objection

Case 1:00-cv-00697-JFM

Document 362

Filed 10/15/2007

Page 5 of 9

138:23-139:2 139:3-25 143:21-145:15 160:14-161:9 161:15-162:22 181:4-182:20 185:1-186:7 194:21-195:17 202:23-204:2 204:20-205:11 April 12, 2002 11:15-13:4 31:7-32:5 42:1-22 43:13-22 46:19-47:1 51:14-52:8 54:13-55:6 56:2-22 60:20-62:8 62:17-63:13 72:22-73:2 91:12-93:13

Best evidence, vague Best evidence, vague Best evidence, vague Foundation (beyond scope of RCFC 30(b)(6)), best evidence, vague Best evidence, vague Foundation (beyond scope of RCFC 30(b)(6)) Best evidence, vague Foundation (beyond scope of RCFC 30(b)(6)), legal conclusion, best evidence Best evidence, vague Legal conclusion, vague

Best evidence, vague Legal conclusion Foundation (beyond scope of RCFC 30(b)(6)), best evidence, vague Foundation (beyond scope of RCFC 30(b)(6)), best evidence, vague Foundation (beyond scope of RCFC 30(b)(6)), best evidence, vague Best evidence Foundation (beyond scope of RCFC 30(b)(6)) Best evidence, vague Best evidence Best evidence Vague Legal conclusion, best evidence

2

Case 1:00-cv-00697-JFM

Document 362

Filed 10/15/2007

Page 6 of 9

120:4-121:9 134:6-135:10 136:8-24 138:9-139:9 145:6-16 May 15, 2002 71:7-72:19 78:7-79:20 86:1-86:15 87:16-88:15 148:1-11 153:13-154:18 180:15-182:23 242:4-18 270:13-22 May 16, 2002 296:18-297:17 390:13-25 393:10-15 May 22, 2002 645:13-647:18 648:19-649:15 680:3-681:22

Foundation (beyond scope of RCFC 30(b)(6)), best evidence, relevance Legal conclusion, foundation (beyond scope of RCFC 30(b)(6)) Legal conclusion, best evidence Legal conclusion, best evidence Best evidence, vague

Foundation, relevance Foundation, relevance Foundation, relevance Foundation, relevance, completeness (answer ends at 88:16) Foundation, relevance Foundation, relevance Legal conclusion, best evidence Vague, relevance Vague

Foundation, vague Best evidence Relevance

Foundation, speculation, best evidence, vague, relevance Foundation, speculation, vague, relevance Foundation, speculation, vague, relevance

3

Case 1:00-cv-00697-JFM

Document 362

Filed 10/15/2007

Page 7 of 9

October 12, 2006 22:2-24:2 54:2-59:20 78:8-78:16 August 4, 2004 3954:12-3957:13 3963:1-3964:24 3968:4-3969:12 3971:15-22 4037:13-4039:21 June 24, 2005 907:23-918:6 Counter-designations: April 11, 2002 16:11-14 31:1-34:5 41:5:-44:15 60:1-63:18 64:22-67:13 74:10-19 92:12-93:9 107:1-108:2 123:15-124:10 144:3-145:15 151:14-154:16 155:18-156:13 158:16-172:12 174:1-22 183:4-184:2 Foundation, relevance Hearsay Hearsay Hearsay Hearsay Vague Foundation, best evidence, speculation, relevance Best evidence, vague, relevance Relevance

4

Case 1:00-cv-00697-JFM

Document 362

Filed 10/15/2007

Page 8 of 9

185:2-186:22 191:8-192:23 206:16-208:6 210:24-211:22 212:3-213:19 April 12, 2002 9:25-16:17 21:17-24:21 37:15-41:8 43:24-45:3 49:14-25 91:4-92:10 100:22-110:1 115:11-116:20 117:11-118:18 160:12-162:19 163:5-19 May 16, 2002 320:15-321:7 322:20-323:17 381:1-25 409:1-25 414:1-25 417:1-418:13 May 22, 2002 575:5-25 599:9-600-11 August 4, 2005 3902:19-3944:25 4065:25-4076:10

5

Case 1:00-cv-00697-JFM

Document 362

Filed 10/15/2007

Page 9 of 9

CERTIFICATE OF FILING I hereby certify that on this 15th day of October, 2007, a copy of foregoing "DEFENDANT'S MOTION SEEKING LEAVE TO FILE OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S TESTIMONY DESIGNATIONS FOR MR. THOMAS POLLOG AND DEFENDANT'S COUNTER-DESIGNATIONS," was filed electronically. I understand that notice of this filing will be sent to all parties by operation of the Court's electronic filing system. Parties may access this filing through the Court's system.

s/Marian E. Sullivan