ERNEST MERRILL and LILA MERRILL, Plaintiffs, v. COUNTY OF MADERA, ET.AL., Defendants
CV F 05-0195 AWI SMS
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Filed 01/16/07
Document 115
Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is pending in this action. In support of their motion and opposition the parties have provided both portions of the reporters’ transcripts from depositions and lodged entire depositions. Plaintiffs have disputed Defendants’ evidence on the ground that the reporter’s certification has not been provided to the court for all depositions.
“A deposition or an extract therefrom is authenticated in a motion for summary judgment when it identifies the names of the deponent and the action and includes the reporter‘s certification that the deposition is a true record of the testimony of the deponent.” Orr v. Bank of America, NT & SA, 285 F.3d 764, 774 (9th Cir. 2002).
The parties are HEREBY INFORMED that the court will dely ruling on the pending motion for ten days. Within ten days, any party requesting the court rely on a deposition transcript, shall provide the court with all information required to authenticate the transcript.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 12, 2007
/s/ Anthony W. Ishii
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE