gautam dutta, esq. (state bar no. 199326) fremont, · pdf file · 2011-08-20exhibit...
TRANSCRIPT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
NOTICE OF NINTH CIRCUIT ORDER
GRANTING APPELLANT JULIUS GALACKI’S
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE
GAUTAM DUTTA, ESQ. (State Bar No. 199326) 39270 Paseo Padre Parkway # 206 Fremont, CA 94538 Telephone: 415.236.2048 Email: [email protected] Fax: 213.405.2416 Attorney for Plaintiffs MICHAEL CHAMNESS, DANIEL FREDERICK, and RICH WILSON
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
MICHAEL CHAMNESS, DANIEL FREDERICK, and RICH WILSON
Plaintiffs,
vs.
DEBRA BOWEN, in only her official capacity as California Secretary of State; DEAN LOGAN, in only his official capacity as Registrar-Recorder / County Clerk of the County of Los Angeles; and DOES 1-10;
Defendants,
ABEL MALDONADO, an individual; CALIFORNIA INDEPENDENT VOTER PROJECT; and CALIFORNIANS TO DEFEND THE OPEN PRIMARY;
Intervenors-Defendants
CASE NO. 2:11-CV-01479 ODW (FFMx)
NOTICE OF NINTH CIRCUIT ORDER GRANTING APPELLANT JULIUS GALACKI’S REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE
HEARING DATE: Aug. 22, 2011
(Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment)
HEARING TIME: 2:30 pm JUDGE: Hon. Otis D. Wright,
II__________ COURTROOM: 11_
TO THE COURT AND ALL PARTIES OF RECORD:
Please take notice that yesterday afternoon, the Ninth Circuit issued an order
(attached as Exhibit 1) that granted (1) Appellant Julius Galacki’s Aug. 5, 2011
Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143 Filed 08/19/11 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:1787
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 2 - NOTICE OF NINTH CIRCUIT ORDER
GRANTING APPELLANT JULIUS GALACKI’S
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE
Request for Judicial Notice (attached as Exhibit 2), and (2) Appellant Julius
Galacki’s Aug. 18, 2011 Request for Judicial Notice (attached as Exhibit 3). In so
doing, the Ninth Circuit took judicial notice of the following documents:
1. Linda Hall’s Request to File an Amicus Letter, which was filed with
the California Court of Appeal (First District) on April 7, 2011 (Exhibit 71 to Appellant Julius Galacki’s Aug. 5, 2011 Request for Judicial Notice, attached as Exhibit 2 to this Notice).
.
2. California Court of Appeal’s April 18, 2011 denial of Linda Hall’s request to file an amicus letter (Exhibit 69 to Appellant Julius Galacki’s Aug. 5, 2011 Request for Judicial Notice, attached as Exhibit 2 to this Notice).
3. A document containing official correspondence, dated August 3, 2010 and August 11, 2010, between the offices of Secretary of State Debra Bowen and then-Lieutenant Governor and now-Intervenor Abel Maldonado (Exhibit 72 to Appellant Julius Galacki’s Aug. 5, 2011 Request for Judicial Notice, attached as Exhibit 2 to this Notice).
4. Aug. 15, 2011 letter sent by the California Citizens Redistricting
Commission to Secretary of State Debra Bowen (Exhibit 1 to Appellant Julius Galacki’s Aug. 18, 2011 Request for Judicial Notice, attached as Exhibit 3 to this Notice).
DATED: Aug. 19, 2011
By: /s/ GAUTAM DUTTA, ESQ.
Attorney for Plaintiffs
MICHAEL CHAMNESS, DANIEL FREDERICK, and RICH WILSON
Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143 Filed 08/19/11 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:1788
EXHIBIT 1 TO THE NOTICE OF NINTH CIRCUIT ORDER
GRANTING APPELLANT JULIUS GALACKI’S REQUEST
FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE
Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-1 Filed 08/19/11 Page 1 of 1 Page ID #:1789
AT/MOATT
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MICHAEL CHAMNESS; et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
ABEL MALDONADO; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.,
and
JULIUS GALACKI,
Intervenor - Appellant.
No. 11-56303
D.C. No. 2:11-cv-01479-ODW
Central District of California,
Los Angeles
ORDER
Before: SCHROEDER and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
Appellant’s motions for judicial notice are granted. Appellant’s emergency
motion for summary reversal is denied.
The previously established briefing schedule remains in effect.
FILEDAUG 18 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERKU.S. COURT OF APPEALS
Case: 11-56303 08/18/2011 ID: 7863437 DktEntry: 14 Page: 1 of 1Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-2 Filed 08/19/11 Page 1 of 1 Page ID #:1790
EXHIBIT 2 TO THE NOTICE OF NINTH CIRCUIT ORDER
GRANTING APPELLANT JULIUS GALACKI’S REQUEST
FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE
Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-3 Filed 08/19/11 Page 1 of 1 Page ID #:1791
- 1 -
No. 11-56303
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
__________
MICHAEL CHAMNESS, DANIEL FREDERICK, and RICH WILSON
Plaintiffs,
JULIUS GALACKI
Intervenor-Applicant / Appellant,
-v.-
DEBRA BOWEN, in only her official capacity as California Secretary of State, and
DEAN LOGAN, in only his official capacity as Registrar-Recorder / County Clerk of Los
Angeles County,
Defendants / Appellees
ABEL MALDONADO, CALIFORNIA INDEPENDENT VOTER PROJECT,
CALIFORNIANS TO DEFEND THE OPEN PRIMARY,
Intervenors-Defendants / Appellees
___________
ON APPEAL FROM A CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ORDER DENYING
JULIUS GALACKI’S MOTION TO INTERVENE
___________
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE BY JULIUS GALACKI IN SUPPORT OF
EMERGENCY MOTION FOR EXPEDITED APPEAL
___________
GAUTAM DUTTA
Attorney for Appellant Julius Galacki
Gautam Dutta, Attorney-at-Law
39270 Paseo Padre Pkwy # 206
Fremont, CA 94538
415.236.2048
213.405.2416 fax
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-1 Page: 1 of 6Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-4 Filed 08/19/11 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #:1792
- 2 -
I. Documents for Which Judicial Notice Is Requested
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 201, Appellant Julius Galacki
respectfully asks the Court to take judicial notice of the following documents
in support of his Emergency Motion for Expedited Appeal. Each document
has been attached as an Exhibit to the accompanying Aug. 4, 2011
Declaration of Gautam Dutta:
A. Exhibit 71: Linda Hall’s Request to File an Amicus
Letter, which was filed with the California Court of
Appeal (First District) on April 7, 2011.
B. Exhibit 69: California Court of Appeal’s April 18, 2011
denial of Linda Hall’s request to file an amicus letter.
C. Exhibit 72: A document that I received from counsel
for Intervenor Maldonado on August 18, 2010. As
stated in a sworn statement by counsel for Intervenor
Maldonado (at p. 28), that document contains official
correspondence, dated August 3, 2010 (at pp. 30-36) and
August 11, 2010 (at pp. 37-77), between the offices of
Secretary of State Debra Bowen and then-Lieutenant
Governor and now-Intervenor Abel Maldonado. This
document was originally attached as Exhibit 2 to the
First Amended Complaint.1
II. The Court May Take Judicial Notice under FRE 201
The Court may take judicial notice of any fact that is “capable of
accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy
1 In its earlier ruling denying Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction, the trial
court declined to take judicial notice of this document. However, a preliminary injunction “is not a preliminary injunction on the ultimate merits.” Sierra On-Line, Inc. v. Phoenix Software, Inc., 739 F.2d 1415, 1423 (9
th Cir. 1984). In this light, Plaintiffs’
May 6, 2011 Motion for Summary Judgment asks the trial court to take judicial notice of this document.
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-1 Page: 2 of 6Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-4 Filed 08/19/11 Page 2 of 6 Page ID #:1793
- 3 -
cannot reasonably be questioned.”2 Toward that end, a court must take
judicial notice if requested by a party and supplied with the necessary
information.3
As a general rule, a court “may presume that public records are
authentic and trustworthy.”4 If a party wishes to challenge the authenticity
of public records, it must carry the “burden” of producing “enough negative
factors to persuade a court that a report should not be permitted.”5
The Court may take judicial notice of matters of record in other court
proceedings “both within and without the federal judicial system, if those
proceedings have a direct relation to matters at issue.”6 Here, Exhibits 69
and 71 consist of documents that were filed in a state court that will soon
consider many of the same constitutional issues raised by this case. Because
both documents have a “direct relation” to the matters at issue, they are both
admissible.
In addition, the Court may take notice of the inter-governmental
correspondence contained in Exhibit 72, because they constitute party
2 Federal Rule of Evidence §201(b).
3 Id. §201(b); see also United States v. Ritchie, 342 F.3d 903, 909 (9
th Cir. 2003).
4 Gilbrook v. City of Westminster, 177 F.3d 839, 858 (9
th Cir. 1999).
5 Id. at 858 (quoting Johnson v. City of Pleasanton, 982 F.2d 350, 352 (9
th Cir.
1992)). 6 United States ex rel.Robinson Rancheria Citizens Council v. Borneo, 971 F.2d
244, 248 (9th Cir. 1992) (internal citation omitted).
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-1 Page: 3 of 6Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-4 Filed 08/19/11 Page 3 of 6 Page ID #:1794
- 4 -
admissions that are admissible under the exception to the hearsay rule.7 The
statement made by Secretary of State Bowen’s legislative staff is admissible
and not subject to the hearsay rule, because (a) the staff member was
authorized by Secretary of State Bowen to make the statement on her behalf,
and (b) the staff member made the statement within the scope of her official
duties.8
Furthermore, both sets of correspondence are indisputably public
records. As a general rule, a court “may presume that public records are
authentic and trustworthy.”9 According to the California Public Records
Act, a public record consists of “any writing containing information relating
to the conduct of the public’s business prepared, owned, used, or retained by
any state or local agency regardless of physical form or characteristic.”10
Quoting an opinion from the Attorney General, one Court of Appeal made it
emphatically clear that virtually every government record is a public record:
This definition [of public record] is intended to cover every
conceivable kind of record that is involved in the governmental
process and will pertain to any new form of record-keeping
instrument as it is developed. Only purely personal information
unrelated to “the conduct of the public's business” could be
considered exempt from this definition, i.e., the shopping list
phoned from home, the letter to a public officer from a friend
which is totally void of reference to governmental activities.11
7 Federal Rules of Evidence §801(d)(2).
8 Id. §801(d)(2)(C) (authorized-party exception to hearsay rule); id. §803(8)
(public-records exception to hearsay rule). 9 Gilbrook v. City of Westminster, 177 F.3d 839, 858 (9
th Cir. 1999).
10 Gov’t Code 6252(e) (emphases added).
11 San Gabriel Tribune v. Superior Court, 192 Cal.Rptr. 415, 422, 143 Cal.App.3d
762, 774 (Cal.App.Ct. 1983) (emphases added).
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-1 Page: 4 of 6Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-4 Filed 08/19/11 Page 4 of 6 Page ID #:1795
- 5 -
If a party wishes to challenge the authenticity of public records, it must carry
the “burden” of producing “enough negative factors to persuade a court that
a report should not be permitted.”12
Here, it is beyond question that both sets of correspondence contained
in Exhibit 72 are public documents, because they consist of government
communications that are not personal in nature. Furthermore, both sets of
correspondence are readily available to and easily verifiable by Defendant
Bowen and Intervenor Maldonado, for they do not dispute that one of
Defendant Bowen’s aides sent that correspondence to one of Intervenor
Maldonado’s aides.13
Indeed, Defendant Bowen herself has “admit[ted] that
on August 3 and 11, 2010, employees of the Secretary of State
communicated with employees of then-Lieutenant Governor Abel
Maldonado regarding SB 6, and that copies of two emails from employees
of the Secretary of State are attached to the [first amended] complaint as
Exhibit 2.”14
Secretary Bowen and Intervenors may claim that Exhibit 72 is not
admissible, because it allegedly contains disputed facts. However, no facts
here are in dispute.15
It is undisputed that one of Defendant Bowen’s top
legislative aides, Nichole Becker, stated in the correspondence that (1) SB
6’s Vote Counting Ban gives voters and candidates the “illusion” that write-
12
Gilbrook, supra, 177 F.3d at 858 (quoting Johnson v. City of Pleasanton, 982 F.2d 350, 352 (9
th Cir. 1992)).
13 Defendant Bowen’s Apr. 4, 2011 Answer to First Amended Complaint ¶19;
Defendant Bowen’s May 23, 2011 Objections to Plaintiffs’ Request for Judicial Notice ¶¶10, 11; Intervenor Maldonado’s May 23, 2011 Objections to Evidence Cited in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment ¶¶10, 11. 14
Defendant Bowen’s Apr. 4, 2011 Answer to First Amended Complaint ¶19 (emphases added). 15
Cf. Lee v. City of Los Angeles, 250 F.3d 668, 688 (9th
Cir. 2001) (court may not take judicial notice of a fact “subject to reasonable dispute”) (quoting Federal Rule of Evidence §201(b)).
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-1 Page: 5 of 6Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-4 Filed 08/19/11 Page 5 of 6 Page ID #:1796
- 6 -
in candidacies would be allowed and write-in votes would be counted, and
(2) SB 6’s Party Preference Ban is not “permissible” because it bans
candidates from using the ballot label of “Independent”.16
Accordingly, the Court may take judicial notice of both sets of
correspondence between the offices of Secretary of State Bowen and
Intervenor Maldonado.
Mr. Galacki respectfully asks the Court to take judicial notice of all of
the documents listed above.
Executed on August 4, 2011, in Fremont, California.
DATED: Aug. 4, 2011
By: /s/ GAUTAM DUTTA, ESQ.
16
August 4, 2011 Declaration of Gautam Dutta, Exh. 72, at 36 & 32.
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-1 Page: 6 of 6Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-4 Filed 08/19/11 Page 6 of 6 Page ID #:1797
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-2 Page: 1 of 1Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-5 Filed 08/19/11 Page 1 of 1 Page ID #:1798
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-3 Page: 1 of 18Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-6 Filed 08/19/11 Page 1 of 18 Page ID #:1799
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-3 Page: 2 of 18Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-6 Filed 08/19/11 Page 2 of 18 Page ID #:1800
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-3 Page: 3 of 18Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-6 Filed 08/19/11 Page 3 of 18 Page ID #:1801
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-3 Page: 4 of 18Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-6 Filed 08/19/11 Page 4 of 18 Page ID #:1802
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-3 Page: 5 of 18Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-6 Filed 08/19/11 Page 5 of 18 Page ID #:1803
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-3 Page: 6 of 18Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-6 Filed 08/19/11 Page 6 of 18 Page ID #:1804
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-3 Page: 7 of 18Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-6 Filed 08/19/11 Page 7 of 18 Page ID #:1805
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-3 Page: 8 of 18Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-6 Filed 08/19/11 Page 8 of 18 Page ID #:1806
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-3 Page: 9 of 18Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-6 Filed 08/19/11 Page 9 of 18 Page ID #:1807
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-3 Page: 10 of 18Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-6 Filed 08/19/11 Page 10 of 18 Page ID #:1808
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-3 Page: 11 of 18Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-6 Filed 08/19/11 Page 11 of 18 Page ID #:1809
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-3 Page: 12 of 18Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-6 Filed 08/19/11 Page 12 of 18 Page ID #:1810
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-3 Page: 13 of 18Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-6 Filed 08/19/11 Page 13 of 18 Page ID #:1811
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-3 Page: 14 of 18Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-6 Filed 08/19/11 Page 14 of 18 Page ID #:1812
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-3 Page: 15 of 18Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-6 Filed 08/19/11 Page 15 of 18 Page ID #:1813
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-3 Page: 16 of 18Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-6 Filed 08/19/11 Page 16 of 18 Page ID #:1814
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-3 Page: 17 of 18Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-6 Filed 08/19/11 Page 17 of 18 Page ID #:1815
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-3 Page: 18 of 18Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-6 Filed 08/19/11 Page 18 of 18 Page ID #:1816
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-4 Page: 1 of 1Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-7 Filed 08/19/11 Page 1 of 1 Page ID #:1817
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 1 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 1 of 42 Page ID #:1818
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 2 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 2 of 42 Page ID #:1819
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 3 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 3 of 42 Page ID #:1820
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 4 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 4 of 42 Page ID #:1821
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 5 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 5 of 42 Page ID #:1822
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 6 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 6 of 42 Page ID #:1823
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 7 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 7 of 42 Page ID #:1824
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 8 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 8 of 42 Page ID #:1825
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 9 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 9 of 42 Page ID #:1826
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 10 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 10 of 42 Page ID #:1827
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 11 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 11 of 42 Page ID #:1828
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 12 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 12 of 42 Page ID #:1829
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 13 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 13 of 42 Page ID #:1830
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 14 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 14 of 42 Page ID #:1831
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 15 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 15 of 42 Page ID #:1832
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 16 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 16 of 42 Page ID #:1833
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 17 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 17 of 42 Page ID #:1834
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 18 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 18 of 42 Page ID #:1835
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 19 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 19 of 42 Page ID #:1836
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 20 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 20 of 42 Page ID #:1837
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 21 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 21 of 42 Page ID #:1838
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 22 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 22 of 42 Page ID #:1839
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 23 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 23 of 42 Page ID #:1840
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 24 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 24 of 42 Page ID #:1841
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 25 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 25 of 42 Page ID #:1842
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 26 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 26 of 42 Page ID #:1843
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 27 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 27 of 42 Page ID #:1844
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 28 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 28 of 42 Page ID #:1845
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 29 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 29 of 42 Page ID #:1846
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 30 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 30 of 42 Page ID #:1847
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 31 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 31 of 42 Page ID #:1848
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 32 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 32 of 42 Page ID #:1849
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 33 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 33 of 42 Page ID #:1850
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 34 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 34 of 42 Page ID #:1851
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 35 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 35 of 42 Page ID #:1852
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 36 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 36 of 42 Page ID #:1853
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 37 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 37 of 42 Page ID #:1854
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 38 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 38 of 42 Page ID #:1855
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 39 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 39 of 42 Page ID #:1856
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 40 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 40 of 42 Page ID #:1857
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 41 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 41 of 42 Page ID #:1858
Case: 11-56303 08/05/2011 ID: 7846241 DktEntry: 4-5 Page: 42 of 42Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-8 Filed 08/19/11 Page 42 of 42 Page ID #:1859
EXHIBIT 3 TO THE NOTICE OF NINTH CIRCUIT ORDER
GRANTING APPELLANT JULIUS GALACKI’S REQUEST
FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE
Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-9 Filed 08/19/11 Page 1 of 1 Page ID #:1860
- 1 -
No. 11-56303
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
__________
MICHAEL CHAMNESS, DANIEL FREDERICK, and RICH WILSON
Plaintiffs,
JULIUS GALACKI
Intervenor-Applicant / Appellant,
-v.-
DEBRA BOWEN, in only her official capacity as California Secretary of State, and
DEAN LOGAN, in only his official capacity as Registrar-Recorder / County Clerk of Los
Angeles County,
Defendants / Appellees
ABEL MALDONADO, CALIFORNIA INDEPENDENT VOTER PROJECT,
CALIFORNIANS TO DEFEND THE OPEN PRIMARY,
Intervenors-Defendants / Appellees
___________
ON APPEAL FROM A CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ORDER DENYING
JULIUS GALACKI’S MOTION TO INTERVENE
___________
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE BY JULIUS GALACKI IN SUPPORT OF
EMERGENCY MOTION FOR SUMMARY REVERSAL
___________
GAUTAM DUTTA
Attorney for Appellant Julius Galacki
Gautam Dutta, Attorney-at-Law
39270 Paseo Padre Parkway # 206
Fremont, CA 94538
415.236.2048
213.405.2416 fax
Case: 11-56303 08/18/2011 ID: 7862809 DktEntry: 12-2 Page: 1 of 3Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-10 Filed 08/19/11 Page 1 of 3 Page ID #:1861
- 2 -
I. Document for Which Judicial Notice Is Requested
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 201, Appellant Julius Galacki
respectfully asks the Court to take judicial notice of the following document,
which has been attached as Exhibit 1 to the accompanying Declaration of
Gautam Dutta: Aug. 15, 2011 letter sent by the California Citizens
Redistricting Commission to Secretary of State Debra Bowen. I obtained
that copy from the former’s website at
http://wedrawthelines.ca.gov/downloads/meeting_handouts_082011/crc_201
10815_1final_cover.pdf (last visited Aug. 16, 2011).
II. The Court May Take Judicial Notice under FRE 201
The Court may take judicial notice of any fact that is “capable of
accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy
cannot reasonably be questioned.”1 Toward that end, a court must take
judicial notice if requested by a party and supplied with the necessary
information.2
As a general rule, a court “may presume that public records are
authentic and trustworthy.”3 If a party wishes to challenge the authenticity
1 Federal Rule of Evidence §201(b).
2 Id. §201(b); see also United States v. Ritchie, 342 F.3d 903, 909 (9
th Cir. 2003).
3 Gilbrook v. City of Westminster, 177 F.3d 839, 858 (9
th Cir. 1999).
Case: 11-56303 08/18/2011 ID: 7862809 DktEntry: 12-2 Page: 2 of 3Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-10 Filed 08/19/11 Page 2 of 3 Page ID #:1862
- 3 -
of public records, it must carry the “burden” of producing “enough negative
factors to persuade a court that a report should not be permitted.”4
Accordingly, the Court may take judicial notice of correspondence
between the California Citizens Redistricting Commission and Secretary of
State Debra Bowen.
Mr. Galacki respectfully asks the Court to take judicial notice of the
document listed above.
Executed on August 17, 2011, in Fremont, California.
DATED: Aug. 17, 2011
By: /s/ GAUTAM DUTTA, ESQ.
4 Id. at 858 (quoting Johnson v. City of Pleasanton, 982 F.2d 350, 352 (9
th Cir.
1992)).
Case: 11-56303 08/18/2011 ID: 7862809 DktEntry: 12-2 Page: 3 of 3Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-10 Filed 08/19/11 Page 3 of 3 Page ID #:1863
- 1 -
No. 11-56303
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
__________
MICHAEL CHAMNESS, DANIEL FREDERICK, and RICH WILSON
Plaintiffs,
JULIUS GALACKI
Intervenor-Applicant / Appellant,
-v.-
DEBRA BOWEN, in only her official capacity as California Secretary of State, and
DEAN LOGAN, in only his official capacity as Registrar-Recorder / County Clerk of Los
Angeles County,
Defendants / Appellees
ABEL MALDONADO, CALIFORNIA INDEPENDENT VOTER PROJECT,
CALIFORNIANS TO DEFEND THE OPEN PRIMARY,
Intervenors-Defendants / Appellees
___________
ON APPEAL FROM A CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ORDER DENYING
JULIUS GALACKI’S MOTION TO INTERVENE
___________
DECLARATION OF GAUTAM DUTTA IN SUPPORT OF
APPELLANT JULIUS GALACKI’S REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE
___________
GAUTAM DUTTA
Attorney for Appellant Julius Galacki
Gautam Dutta, Attorney-at-Law
39270 Paseo Padre Parkway # 206
Fremont, CA 94538
415.236.2048
213.405.2416 fax
Case: 11-56303 08/18/2011 ID: 7862809 DktEntry: 12-3 Page: 1 of 3Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-11 Filed 08/19/11 Page 1 of 3 Page ID #:1864
- 2 -
I, Gautam Dutta, declare as follows:
1. I am an attorney licensed to practice in the State of California.
I have been a member of the State Bar of California since 1998 (State Bar
No. 199326), and am also admitted to practice before this Court. I represent
Appellant Julius Galacki in this appeal.
2. I have attached, as Exhibit 1, a true and accurate copy of the
Aug. 15, 2011 letter sent by the California Citizens Redistricting
Commission to Secretary of State Debra Bowen. I obtained that copy from
the former’s website at
http://wedrawthelines.ca.gov/downloads/meeting_handouts_082011/crc_201
10815_1final_cover.pdf (last visited Aug. 18, 2011).
Case: 11-56303 08/18/2011 ID: 7862809 DktEntry: 12-3 Page: 2 of 3Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-11 Filed 08/19/11 Page 2 of 3 Page ID #:1865
- 3 -
I declare under penalty of perjury and the laws of the United States
that the foregoing is true and correct and are based on my personal
knowledge, except for matters stated on information and belief; and, as to
those matters, I believe them to be true. If called as a witness, I could
competently testify thereto.
Executed on August 18, 2011, in Fremont, California.
DATED: Aug. 18, 2011
By: /s/ GAUTAM DUTTA, ESQ.
Case: 11-56303 08/18/2011 ID: 7862809 DktEntry: 12-3 Page: 3 of 3Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-11 Filed 08/19/11 Page 3 of 3 Page ID #:1866
EXHIBIT 1 TO THE DECLARATION OF GAUTAM DUTTA
Case: 11-56303 08/18/2011 ID: 7862809 DktEntry: 12-4 Page: 1 of 1Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-12 Filed 08/19/11 Page 1 of 1 Page ID #:1867
901 P Street, Suite 154A, Sacramento, CA 95814
August 15, 2011
The Hon. Debra Bowen
California Secretary of State
1500 11th
Street
Sacramento, California 95814
Dear Secretary Bowen:
The California Citizens Redistricting Commission (Commissioner) was established
pursuant to the procedures set forth by Proposition 11, the Voters First Act, and
Proposition 20, the Voters First Act for Congress, the provisions of which are now found
in Section 2 of Article XXI of the California Constitution and at Government Code
Section 8252. These constitutional and statutory provisions set forth the Commission’s
responsibilities with respect to drawing the boundary lines for the California Assembly,
Senate, Board of Equalization and Congressional districts (the Maps).
The Voters First Act for Congress requires the Commission to certify the Maps, and
prepare a final report, and cause them to be provided to your office by August 15, 2011.
Accordingly, this letter confirms that the Commission has timely completed these
responsibilities and hereby provides the Secretary of State’s Office with the following:
1. State Assembly. Resolution of August 15, 2011 certifying the statewide
California Assembly maps were approved by the Commission in the manner
required by Section 2 of Article XXI of the California Constitution; a copy of the
statewide Assembly map; copies of the 80 individual Assembly districts; and a
“disc” labeled crc_20110815_assembly_certified_statewide.zip SHA-1:
323d2c56df6bf3ad6b3b4e58fd7c5d0338a476b8 containing the unique data files
for the Assembly districts, from which the statewide and individual district maps
are created.
2. State Senate. Resolution of August 15, 2011 certifying the statewide California
Senate maps were approved by the Commission in the manner required by
Section 2 of Article XXI of the California Constitution; a copy of the statewide
Senate map; copies of the 40 individual Senate districts; and a “disc” labeled
crc_20110815_senate_certified_statewide.zip SHA-1:
Case: 11-56303 08/18/2011 ID: 7862809 DktEntry: 12-5 Page: 1 of 2Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-13 Filed 08/19/11 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:1868
14cd4e126ddc5bdce946f67376574918f3082d6b containing the unique data files
for the Senate districts, from which the statewide and individual district maps are
created.
3. State Board of Equalization. Resolution of August 15, 2011 certifying the
statewide California Board of Equalization maps were approved by the
Commission in the manner required by Section 2 of Article XXI of the California
Constitution; a copy of the statewide Board of Equalization map; copies of the
four individual Board of Equalization districts; and a “disc” labeled
crc_20110815_boe_certified_statewide.zipSHA-1:
3dd8d0f1325818b92429f987c03668ba036ece1d containing the unique data files
for the Board of Equalization districts from which the statewide and individual
district maps are created.
4. Congressional Districts. Resolution of August 15, 2011 certifying the statewide
California Congressional districts were approved by the Commission in the
manner required by Section 2 of Article XXI of the California Constitution; a
copy of the statewide Congressional map; copies of the 53 individual
Congressional districts; and a “disc” labeled
crc_20110815_congress_certified_statewide.zip SHA-1:
1893c0695a42454a202f5b1ef433abff6b491db9 containing the unique data files
for the Congressional districts from which the statewide and individual district
maps are created.
5. Final Report. A copy of the final report prepared as required by Section 2(h),
Article XXI of the California Constitution.
It has been an honor for the Commission to serve the people of the State of California.
Sincerely,
_________________________________
Vincent Barabba
Acting Chair
On Behalf of the California Citizens
Redistricting Commission
________________________________
Gabino Aguirre
Acting Vice Chair
On Behalf of the California Citizens
Redistricting Commission
Case: 11-56303 08/18/2011 ID: 7862809 DktEntry: 12-5 Page: 2 of 2Case 2:11-cv-01479-ODW -FFM Document 143-13 Filed 08/19/11 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:1869