Free Response to Motion - District Court of California - California

Case 3:07-cv-02231-RJB

Document 15-3

Filed 02/12/2008

Page 1 of 2

1 JAMES J. MITTERMILLER, Cal. Bar No. 85177 [email protected] 2 FRANK J. POLEK, Cal. Bar No. 167852 [email protected] 3 JOHN C. DINEEN, Cal. Bar No. 222095 [email protected] 4 SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP A Limited Liability Partnership Including Professional Corporations 5 501 West Broadway, 19th Floor 6 San Diego, California 92101-3598 Telephone: 619-338-6500 7 Facsimile: 619-234-3815 8 Attorneys for Defendants SPRINT SOLUTIONS, INC. and SPRINT9 SPECTRUM L.P. 10 11 12 13 14 UTILITY CONSUMERS' ACTION NETWORK and ERIC TAYLOR, on 15 behalf of themselves, their members and/or all others similarly situated, as 16 applicable, 17 18 v. Judge: Courtroom: Date: Time: Hon. Leo S. Papas G N/A N/A Plaintiffs, Case No. 07 CV 2231 W (LSP) EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER PERMITTING EXPEDITED DISCOVERY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

19 SPRINT SOLUTIONS, INC.; SPRINT SPECTRUM L.P.; SPRINT-NEXTEL 20 CORPORATION, 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
W02-WEST:8FP1\400706722.1 USDC Case No. 07 CV 2231 W (LSP)

Defendants.

EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' EX PARTE APP FOR ORDER PERMITTING EXPEDITED DISCOVERY

Case 3:07-cv-02231-RJB

Document 15-3

Filed 02/12/2008

Page 2 of 2

1

Defendants Sprint Solutions, Inc. and Sprint Spectrum, L.P.

2 (collectively "Sprint") object to Plaintiffs' evidence as follows: 3 4 5 6 7 Exhibit 5, letter from J. Mittermiller to 8 A. Mansfield, dated January 25, 2008 9 10 11 12 13 ¶ 5 (page 1, lines 12-22) ("I have 14 15 16 ¶ ¶ 8-11 (page 2, line 4 through page 4, 17 line 27) ("Some customers . . . saved 18 $400." [snippets from customer complaints 19 on UCAN website) 20 21 Dated: February 12, 2008 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
W02-WEST:8FP1\400706722.1 USDC Case No. 07 CV 2231 W (LSP)

DECLARATION OF ALAN MANSFIELD Evidence Objection

F.R.E. 408 (communication in furtherance of settlement)

DECLARATION OF ART NEILL Evidence Objection

Hearsay, relevance, inadmissible summary

. . .20 minutes or less.")

Hearsay, relevance

By s/Frank J. Polek Attorneys for Defendants SPRINT SOLUTIONS, INC. and SPRINT-SPECTRUM L.P. E-mail: [email protected]

-1-

EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS' EX PARTE APP FOR ORDER PERMITTING EXPEDITED DISCOVERY