Free Order on Motion to Amend/Correct - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:02-cv-00024-FMA

Document 103

Filed 04/18/2005

Page 1 of 1

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
No. 02-24L (Filed: April 18, 2005) ____________ THE PUEBLO OF LAGUNA, Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant. __________ ORDER ___________ On March 18, 2005, defendant filed a motion pursuant to section 6 of the court's record retention order of March 19, 2004, seeking to amend section 5(b) of that order to eliminate what it believes is a material ambiguity. On April 8, 2005, plaintiff filed a response to defendant's motion indicating that although it remains concerned about various elements of the record preservation process, it does not oppose plaintiff's proposed amendment to the record retention order. The court is amenable to the essence of the proposed change, but wishes to effectuate the change with slightly different language. Thus, defendant's motion is hereby GRANTED, in part, and DENIED, in part. Accordingly, paragraph 5(b) of the records retention order dated March 19, 2004, is hereby modified to read as follows: (b) "Preservation" is to be interpreted broadly to accomplish the goal of maintaining the integrity of all documents, data, and tangible things reasonably anticipated to be subject to discovery under RCFC 26, 45, and 56(e) in this action. Preservation includes taking reasonable steps to prevent the partial or full destruction, alteration, testing, deletion, shredding, incineration, wiping, relocation, migration, theft, mutation, negligent handling, or intentional mishandling of any documents, data, or tangible things, if such action or actions would make that material incomplete or inaccessible.

The court notes that the modification described herein is intended only to eliminate a potential ambiguity from the text of the retention order, and in no way acts to reduce defendant's obligation to maintain the integrity of documents, data, and tangible things reasonably anticipated to be subject to discovery in this action. IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Francis M. Allegra Francis M. Allegra Judge