Free Order - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:06-cv-00407-ECH

Document 105

Filed 06/25/2008

Page 1 of 4

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
No. 06-407 T (into which have been consolidated Nos. 06-408T, 06-409T, 06-410T, 06-411T, 06-810T, 06-811T) (E-Filed: June 25, 2008)

) ALPHA I, L.P., BY AND THROUGH ROBERT ) SANDS, A NOTICE PARTNER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) THE UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendant. ) ) ) BETA PARTNERS, L.L.C, BY AND THROUGH ) ROBERT SANDS, A NOTICE PARTNER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) THE UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendant. ) ) ) R, R, M & C PARTNERS, L.L.C., BY AND ) THROUGH R, R, M & C GROUP, L.P., A ) NOTICE PARTNER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. )

06-407 T

06-408 T

06-409 T

Case 1:06-cv-00407-ECH

Document 105

Filed 06/25/2008

Page 2 of 4

) ) ) Defendant. ) ) ) R, R, M & C GROUP, L.P., BY AND THROUGH ) ROBERT SANDS, A NOTICE PARTNER ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) THE UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendant. ) ) ) CWC PARTNERSHIP I, BY AND THROUGH ) TRUST FBO ZACHARY STERN U/A FIFTH G, ) ANDREW STERN AND MARILYN SANDS, ) TRUSTEES, A NOTICE PARTNER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) THE UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendant. ) ) ) MICKEY MANAGEMENT, L.P., BY AND ) THROUGH MARILYN SANDS, A NOTICE ) PARTNER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) THE UNITED STATES,

06-410 T

06-411 T

06-810 T

2

Case 1:06-cv-00407-ECH

Document 105

Filed 06/25/2008

Page 3 of 4

) ) ) Defendant. ) ) ) M, L, R & R, BY AND THROUGH RICHARD E. ) SANDS, TAX MATTERS PARTNER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) THE UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendant. ) ) THE UNITED STATES, ORDER

06-811 T

On July 9, 2007 plaintiffs served defendant with Plaintiffs' Rule 30(b)(6) Notice to Defendant. See Plaintiffs' Response to United States' Motion For Protective Order (plaintiffs' Response or Pls.' Resp.) Ex. A. Defendant filed the United States' Motion For Protection or Protective Order (defendant's Motion or Def.'s Mot.) on July 18, 2007. Def.'s Mot. 1. As defendant states in its Motion, "[The] notice seeks to depose one or more representatives of the United States with respect to eight separately enumerated categories." Id. at 4. Plaintiff filed plaintiffs' Response on August 6, 2007, Pls.' Resp 1, and defendant filed the United States' Reply to Plaintiffs' Response to United States' Motion For Protection or Protective Order (defendant's Reply or Def.'s Reply) on August 20, 2007, Def.'s Reply 1. Defendant and plaintiffs agree that defendant's Motion is moot "to the extent it concerns the first seven topics in plaintiffs' Rule 30(b)(6) notice." Parties' Joint Status Report, Docket No. 104. The parties also agree that "[d]efendant's [M]otion is not moot as it relates to defendant's objection to the eighth topic posed by plaintiffs." Id. Defendant "seeks protection with respect to the entirety of this line [the eighth topic] of inquiry" because the documents "are both irrelevant and protected by executive (deliberative process) privilege." Def.'s Mot. 13. Plaintiffs, on the other hand, contend that the information sought is relevant and that the privilege is either inapplicable, waived, or overcome. Pls.' Resp. 2. 3

Case 1:06-cv-00407-ECH

Document 105

Filed 06/25/2008

Page 4 of 4

Neither party addressed the issue of whether the deliberative process privilege was properly invoked by defendant. See generally Marriott Intern. Resorts. L.P. v. United States (Marriott), 437 F.3d 1302, 1308 (Fed. Cir. 2006); Pac. Gas & Elec. v. United States, 70 Fed. Cl. 128, 144 (2006). Defendant shall file a brief addressing whether the deliberative process privilege was properly invoked on or before Tuesday, July 8, 2008. Plaintiff shall file a responsive brief on or before Friday, July 11, 2008. The parties are urged to contact the court at any time when they believe the involvement of the court will help to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of this action. See RCFC 1. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Emily C. Hewitt EMILY C. HEWITT Judge

4