IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
ELOUISE PEPION COBELL, al., gt 
Plain tiffs, 
V. Case No. 1:96CVO1285 (RCL) 
1 
1 
1 
) 
1 
(Special Master Alan L. Balaran) GALE A. NORTON, Secretary of the Interior, 
) 
) 
al., gt 
) 
Defendants. 
INTERIOR DEPENDANTS' MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER 
AND MOTION TO QUASH PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF DEPOSITION 
AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED 
TO NON-PARTY MICHAEL CARR AND DEFENDANTS 
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c) and (d), the Secretary of the Interior and the Acting 
Assistant Secretary of the Interior - Indian Affairs ("Interior Defendants") hereby move for a 
protective order and an order quashing the plaintiffs' notice of deposition directed to former 
Interior attorney Michael Carr and the accompanying document production request directed to 
Mr. Carr and defendants. The improper discovery requests are Exhibit 1 to the accompanying 
memorandum of points and authorities. 
As explained in further detail in the accompanying memorandum of points and 
authorities, the deposition notice and document request are unauthorized and, indeed, in direct 
contravention of the Special Master's scheduling orders. Further, the deposition notice and 
document request are intended to elicit discovery in connection with plaintiffs' allegations of 
criminal and civil contempt against Mr. Can- and potentially other individuals named in plaintiffs' 
October 19,200 1 Motion f o r Order to Show Cause Why interior Defendants and Their 
Employees and Counsel Should Not Be Held in Contempt for Violating Court Orders and for 
Defrauding This Court in Connection with Trial One (the ''October 19,2001 motion"). The Court of Appeals' recent decision in Cobell v. Norton, 334 F.3d 1 128 (D.C. Cir. 2003), makes 
clear that the discovery plaintiffs seek from Mr. Carr and the defendants is impermissible 
because of the potential criminal ramifications of plaintiffs' allegations. 
Counsel for Interior Defendants have attempted in good faith to resolve this discovery 
matter prior to filing this motion. Plaintiffs' counsel, however, have refused to withdraw the 
notice and document request, and therefore this motion is necessary. See Exhibit 2 to 
accompanying memorandum of points and authorities (certificate of counsel). A proposed report 
and recommendation is attached. 
September 1 1,2003 DATED: 
Respectfully submitted, 
ROBERT D. McCALLUM, JR. 
Associate Attorney General 
PETER D. KEISLER 
Assistant Attorney General 
STUART E. SCHIFFER 
Deputy Assistant Attorney General 
MTCHAEL F. HERTZ 
Director 
Senior Triakdounsel I 
D.C. Bar No. 425194 
Tracy L. Hilmer 
D.C. Bar No. 421219 
Trial Attorney 
Commercial Litigation Branch 
Civil Division 
P.O. Box 261 
Ben FrankIin Station 
Washington, D.C. 20044 
(202) 307-0474 
-2- IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
ELOUISE PEPION COBELL, al., 
Plaintiffs, 
V. Case No. 1 :96CV01285 (RCL) 
) 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
(Special Master Alan L. Balaran) GALE A. NORTON, Secretary of the Interior, 
al., 
) 
) 
1 
) Defendants. 
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF 
INTERIOR DEFENDANTSf MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER 
AND MOTION TO QUASH PLAINTIFFSf NOTICE OF DEPOSITION 
AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED 
TO NON-PARTY MICHAEL CARR AND DEFENDANTS 
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c) and (d), the Secretary of the Interior and the Acting 
Assistant Secretary of the Interior - Indian Affairs ("Interior Defendants") hereby move for a 
protective order and an order quashing the plaintiffs' unauthorized and otherwise improper 
attempt to take discovery in the contempt proceedings currently before the Special Master. On 
August 21, 2003, plaintiffs served a notice of deposition directed to former Interior attorney 
Michael Can accompanied by a document production request directed to Mr. Carr and 
defendants. Exhibit 1. The deposition notice and document request are unauthorized and, 
indeed, in direct contravention of the Special Master's scheduling orders. Further, the deposition 
notice and document request are intended to elicit discovery in connection with plaintiffs' 
allegations of criminal and civil contempt against Mr. Carr and potentially other individuals 
named in plaintiffs' October 19, 2001 Motion for Order to Show Cause Why Interior Defendants 
and Their Employees and Counsel Should Not Be Held in Contempt f o r Violating Court Orders 
andfor Defrauding This Court in Connectiorz with Trial One (the "October 19, 2001 motion"). The Court of Appeals' recent decision in Cohell v. Norton, 334 F.3d 1128 (D.C. Cir. 2003), 
makes clear that the discovery plaintiffs seek from Mr. Carr and the defendants is impermissible 
because of the potential criminal ramifications of their allegations. 
Counsel for Interior Defendants have attempted in good faith to resolve this matter prior 
to filing this motion. Plaintiffs' counsel, however, have refused to withdraw the notice and 
document request, and therefore this motion is necessary. See Exhibit 2 (certificate of counsel). 
specifications: 
I. 
2. 
3. 
UP- 
Backwound 
On October 19, 2001, plaintiffs filed the show cause motion that is the subject of the Carr 
deposition notice and accompanying document request. On November 28,2001, the Court 
entered an Order to Show Cause granting plaintiffs' motion "as to the Interior defendants in their 
official capacities." The Order directed defendants Norton and McCaleb to "show cause why 
they should not be held in civil contempt of court in their official capacities" upon four 
That defendants had failed to comply with the Court's Order of December 
21, 1999 to initiate a Historical Accounting Project. 
That defendants committed a fraud on the Court by concealing the Department's 
true actions regarding the Historical Accounting Project during the period from 
March 2000 until January 2001. 
That defendants committed a fraud on the Court by failing to disclose the true 
status of the TAAMS project between September 1999 and December 2 1 , 1999. 
4. That defendants committed a fraud on the Court by filing false and misleading 
quarterly reports starting in March 2000, regarding TAAMS and BIA Data Clean- 
Order to Show Cause, Novcmber 28, 2001 at 1-2. The order stated that the "Court defers ruling 
at this time on plaintiffs' motion to order non-party employees and counsel to show cause." Id. at 
1. On December 6,2001, the Court entered a Supplemental Order to Show Cause, adding a fifth 
-L- specification that defendants committed a fraud on the Court by making false and misleading 
representations starting in March 2000, regarding computer security of mM trust data. Plaintiffs' 
October 19,2001 motion did not address the IIM computer security issue which was the subject 
of the Supplemental Order to Show Cause, and plaintiffs did not amend their motion to include 
that specification. 
The five issues identified in the Orders to Show Cause were tried as to the named Interior 
Defendants in their official capacity, following which the Court issued its September 17, 2002 
order. Cobell v. Norton, 226 F. Supp. 2d I (D.D.C. 2002). As part of the September 17,2002 
order, the Court "deferred ruling on the plaintiffs' motion filed on October 19, 2001, as it related 
to 37 non-party employees and counsel." 226 F. Supp. 2d at 155. The Court explained this 
deferment: "Upon consideration of the memoranda filed in support of and in opposition to the 
plaintiffs' motion, the record in this case, and the applicable law, the Court finds that it is not 
appropriate to order these individuals to show cause at this time why they should not be held in 
contempt of court." Id. Instead, the Court referred the matter "to Special Master Balaran so that 
he may develop a complete record with respect to these 37 non-party individuals." Id.; see also 
id. at 162 ("It is further ORDERED that the plaintiffs' motion for order to show cause, filed 
October 19, 2001, shall be REFERRED to Special Master Balaran. Special Master Balaran shall 
issue a report and recommendation with respect to each of the 37 non-party individuals named in 
the plaintiffs' motion."). 
On October 7,2002, the Special Master issued a proposed protocol and schedule for 
addressing the two show cause orders that had been referred to him by the Court. The proposal 
included a discovery period before any determination of the legal sufficiency of plaintiffs' 
allegations. Following a case management conference held on October 30, 2002, in which the 
-3- propriety of discovery was among several topics addressed by the Special Master, counsel for 
the parties and counsel for the Named Individuals in their personal capacities, the Special Master 
issued a memorandum setting forth Revised Procedures and Schedule for Investigation Into 
Plaintiffs's'otion for Orders to Show Cause (dated Nov. 4,2002) ("Revised Procedures 
Memorandum"). In the Revised Procedures Memorandum, the Special Master provided that he 
would "preliminarily decide whether the individual Bills of Particular warrant dismissal before 
initiating any discovery." Revised Procedures Memorandum at 2. The Revised Procedures 
Memorandum also set forth a schedule for the plaintiffs to file "bills of particulars" setting forth 
the specific instances of contempt of which they accused each Named Individual and the 
evidence supporting such allegations. Plaintiffs' bills regarding the October 19,200 1 motion 
were to be filed by May 1, 2003. Thereafter, the Named Individuals - in both their official and 
personal capacities - were permitted to fiIe briefs challenging the legal sufficiency of plaintiffs' 
allegations. Briefing on those challenges was completed on August 18, 2003, and the Special 
Master has not yet issued any report and recommendation concerning those challenges. 
Likewise, the Master has never authorized the initiation of discovery in connection with the show 
cause motions over which he is currently presiding. 
By a letter to the Special Master dated December 4, 2002, plaintiffs' counsel proposed the 
initiation of discovery in these proceedings. Exhibit 3. The Special Master wrote back to 
plaintiffs' counsel the same day, reiterating his directive that discovery would not take place 
"[ulntil the report and recommendation issues regarding the legal sufficiency of the claims 
lodged against each of the Named Individuals. . . .'I Exhibit 4. 
On August 21,2003, plaintiffs served upon government counsel a notice of deposition for 
Mr. Can accompanied by a request for production of documents directed to Mr. Carr and 
-4- defendants. Exhibit 1. The request for production states that it seeks "documents related to the 
subject matter of the motions for order to show cause, bills of particular, Interior Office of 
Inspector General investigations and draft, interim and final reports, and the preliminary 
contempt proceedings . . . before Special Master Alan Balaran that are relevant to Named 
Individual Carr." Id. at 2. Thus, it is clear that plaintiffs are seeking discovery in furtherance of 
their October 19,2001 show cause motion and the bills of particulars filed in supplementation of 
that motion. The deposition notice and document request are in direct contravention of the 
Special Master's determination that no discovery will be permitted in these proceedings before 
the issuance of the Master's report and recommendation on the legal sufficiency of plaintiffs' 
claims against the Named Individuals. The plaintiffs' discovery requests are, therefore, 
unauthorized and should be quashed. Further, plaintiffs have indicated an intention to issue 
additional unauthorized discovery requests in these proceedings. Accordingly, it is appropriate 
for the Master to recommend that the Court enter a protective order precluding such discovery.' 
Areumen t 
Plaintiffs' Attempted Discovery is Unauthorized. 
Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d), a party "may not seek discovery from any source before the 
A. 
parties have conferred as required by Rule 26(f)." No Rule 26(f) conference has taken place. 
Although plaintiffs sought leave of the Master to undertake discovery, the Master declined to 
'Government counsel wrote to the Special Master on August 28, 2003, requesting that the 
Master affirm, as he had in his December 4,2002 letter to plaintiffs' counsel, that the government 
and the Named Individuals need not respond to any discovery in this matter at this time. That 
letter was also served upon plaintiffs' counsel. Exhibit 5 (attachments omitted). Private counsel 
for Mr. Carr likewise wrote to plaintiffs' counsel, with a copy to the Special Master, seeking the 
withdrawal of the improper notice. Exhibit 6. Nevertheless, plaintiffs have not withdrawn their 
improper discovery requests. 
-5- permit discovery at this time. Thus, plaintiffs have no right to take discovery of Interior 
Defendants or any Named Individual in these proceedings at this time. Nonetheless, plaintiffs 
have stated on their website that the Carr notice is "the first in a series" of depositions they intend 
to notice. See Exhibit 7, Therefore, the Special Master should recommend that the Court enter a 
protective order confirming that the Named Individuals and the defendants need not respond to 
any discovery requests in connection with the proceedings concerning the two show cause 
motions that are currentfy before the Special Master. 
B. Plaintiffs Cannot Take Discovery of the Named Individuals Because of the Potential 
Criminal Ramifications of the Proceeding. 
In seeking to depose Mr. Cam and to require him and Interior Defendants to produce 
documents relating to their October 19,2001 motion, plaintiffs have entirely ignored the Court of 
Appeals' July 18,2003 decision. The Court of Appeals held that the District Court's contempt 
citations on all four specifications arising from plaintiffs' October 19,2001 show cause motion 
were "criminal in nature." Cobell v. Norton, 334 F.3d 1128, 1146 (D.C. Cir. 2003). The Court 
of Appeals also made clear that anyone accused of criminal contempt - as Mr. Can and other 
Named Individuals here have been accused - is entitled to the full measure of due process rights 
afforded in any criminal proceeding. Id. at 1147. As we and private counsel for the Named 
Individuals have noted repeatedly, the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure do not permit the sort 
of wide-ranging discovery that plaintiffs are again attempting to undertake with this notice of 
deposition and request for production of documents. See, e.g., Government's Response to Special 
Master's Proposed Protocol for Proceedings Regarding Plaintiffs' March 20, 2002 Motion for 
Order to Show Cause (filed Oct. 15, 2002) at 2 & note 2; Memorandurn of Points and Authorities 
in Opposition to Plaint@s'Bilis of Particulars in Support of Motion f o r Order to Show Cause 
-6- Why Interior Defendants and Their Employees and Counsel Should Not Be Held in Contempt for 
Violating Court Orders and Defrauding this Court in Connection with Trial One (Filed October 
19, 2001) (filed June 2,2003) at 18- 19; United States' Reply to Plaint@' Opposition to Named 
Individuals' Responses to Bills of Particulars Relating to Plaint@s' October 19, 2001 Motion for 
Order to Show Cause (filed Aug. 18,2003) at 1-3. Accordingly, it would constitute a serious 
violation of Mr. Carr's due process rights to permit the discovery to proceed on allegations that 
the Court of Appeals has already declared to be criminal in nature. 
Further, since the plaintiffs' allegations are clearly criminal in nature, plaintiffs' counsel 
are not permitted to have any role in conducting an investigation of those allegations. See 
LandmarkLegalFound. v. EPA, 2003 WL 21715678 at *4 (D.D.C. July 25,2003), citing Young 
v. United States ex rel. Vuitton et Fils, S.A., 481 U.S. 787, 814 (1987). 
C. The Notice Is Also Defective Because Interior Defendants Cannot Produce Mr. Carr 
or Any Items in His Personal Possession. 
Mr. Carr is no longer employed by the federal government. Accordingly, Interior 
Defendants cannot produce him or anything in his personal possession. For this reason, too, the 
notice of deposition and document requests are defective and should be quashed. 
Conclusion 
For all the foregoing reasons, Interior Defendants request that the Special Master issue a 
report and recommendation that plaintiffs' August 2 1,2003 Notice of Deposition and Request for 
Production of Documents directed to Mr. Carr and defendants be quashed and that a protective 
order be entered prohibiting discovery in connection with the show cause proceedings before the 
Special Master until further order of the Court. 
-7- Respectfully submitted, 
ROBERT D. McCALLUM, JR. 
Associate Attorney General 
PETER D. KEISLER 
Assistant Attorney General 
STUART E. SCHIFFER 
Deputy Assistant Attorney General 
MICHAEL F. HERTZ 
D.C. Bar No. 425 194 
Tracy L. Hilmer 
D.C. Bar No. 421219 
Trial Attorney 
Commercial Litigation Branch 
Civil Division 
P.O. Box 261 
Ben Franklin Station 
Washington, D.C. 20044 
(202) 307-0474 
DATED: September 11,2003 
-8- IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE DlSTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
ELOUISE PEPION COBELL, gt 4, 
Plaintiffs, 
V. Case No. 1 :96CV01285 (RCL) 
GALE A. NORTON, Secretary of the Interior, (Special Master Alan L. Balaran) ) 
1 
) 
1 
1 
) 
1 
al., 
Defendants. 
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF SPECIAL MASTER 
CONCERNING INTERIOR DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR 
PROTECTIVE ORDER AND MOTION TO QUASH 
PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF DEPOSITION AND 
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS DIRECTED 
TO NON-PARTY MICHAEL CARR AND DEFENDANTS 
On September 17,2002, the Court referred to the Special Master (1) plaintiffs' Motion 
for Order to Show Cause Why Interior Defendants and their Counsel Should Not be Held in 
Contempt for Destro-ying E-mail (filed March 20,2002) (the "March 20,2002 motion") and (2) 
plaintiffs' Motion for Order to Show Cause Why Interior Defendants and Their Employees and 
Counsel Should Not Be Held in Contempt f o r Violating Court Orders and f o r Defrauding This 
Court in Connection with Trial One (filed Oct. 19,2001) as it pertained to the 37 non-party 
individuals named in plaintiffs' motion (the "October 19,2001 motion"). Pursuant to the Court's 
referral of the March 20, 2003 and October 19,200 1 motions, the Special Master issued a 
memorandum setting forth the Revised Procedures and Schedule for Investigation Into PIaint#s' 
Motion for Orders to Show Cause (dated Nov. 4, 2002). Therein, the Master determined to 
"preliminarily decide whether the individual Bills of Particular warrant dismissal before initiating 
any discovery." Id. at 2. Upon consideration of Interior Defendants' Motion for Protective Order and Motion to 
Quash Plaint#s' Notice of Deposition and Request for Production of Documents Directed to 
Non-Party Michael Curr and Defendants (filed Sept. 11,2003), and the record before the Special 
Master concerning the Court's referral of plaintiffs' March 20,2002 and October 19, 2001 
motions, the Special Master recommends that the Court: 
Enter an order prohibiting discovery in connection with the plaintiffs' March 20, I . 
2002 motion or October 19,2001 motion until further order of the Court; and 
2. Enter an order quashing the Notice of Deposition and Request for Production of 
Documents, dated August 2 1 2003, directed by plaintiffs to Michael Carr and 
defendants. 
Alan L. Balaran 
Special Master 
Dated: 
IT IS SO ORDERED. 
Hon. Royce C. Lamberth 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 
DATED: 
-2- cc: 
Tracy Hilmer 
Dodge Wells 
Sandra Spooner 
Commercial Litigation Branch 
Civil Division 
P.O. Box 875 
Ben Franklin Station 
Washington, D.C. 20044-0875 
Fax (202) 514-9163 
(202) 6 16-3085 
Alan L. Balaran, Esq. 
Special Master 
17 17 Pennsylvania Ave., NW 
12th Floor 
Washington, DC 20006 
(202) 986-8477 
Keith Harper, Esq. 
Native American Rights Fund 
1712 N Street, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20036-2976 
(202) 822-0068 
Counsel for Plaintiffs 
Dennis M Gingold, Esq. 
Mark Kester Brown, Esq. 
607 14th Street, N.W. 
Box 6 
Washington, D.C. 20005 
(202) 3 18-2372 
Counsel for Plaint f l s 
Elliott Levitas, Esq. 
1100 Peachtree Street, Suite 2800 
Atlanta, GA 30309-4530 
Counsel for Pluint f l s 
Earl Old Person (Pro se) 
Blackfeet Tribe 
P.O. Box 850 
Browning, MT 594 17 
(406) 338-7530 
Mary Lou Soller, Esq. 
Adam Feinberg, Esq. 
Miller & Chevalier 
655 15th Street, N.W., Suite 900 
Washington, D.C. 20005 
By First Class Mail 
Counsel for Chester Mills and Terence 
Virden 
Earl J. Silbert, Esq. 
Robert A. Salerno, Esq. 
Adam Hoffinger, Esq. 
Piper Rudnick LLP 
1200 19th Street, N.W., 7th Floor, 
Washington, D.C. 20036 
Counsel for John Cruden, Jack Haugrud 
and Sarah Himmelhoch 
David S. Krakoff, Esq. 
Alessio D. Evangelista 
Jamie Abrams 
Christine Stroop 
Beveridge & Diamond, P.C. 
1350 I Street, N.W. Suite 700 
Washington, D.C. 20005-33 11 
Counsel for Day1 Wiite 
Amy Berman Jackson, Esq. 
Trout & Richards 
1 100 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. 
Suite 730 
Washington, D.C. 20036 
Counsel for Edith Blackwell 
William H. Briggs, Jr., Esq. 
Marc E. Rindner, Esq. 
Ross, Dixon & Bell 
2001 K Street, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20006- 1040 
Counsel for Phillip Brooks 
Michael Bromwich, Esq. 
Anne Perry, Esq. 
Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson 
1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.Suite 800 
Washington, D.C. 20004-2505 
- 1 - B. Michael Rauh, Esq. 
Julie Campbell, Esq. 
Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP 
1501 M Street, N.W. Suite 700 
Washington, D.C. 20005 
Counsel for Neal McCaleb 
Barry Boss, Esq. 
Asbill, Junkin, Moffitt & Boss 
1615 New Hampshire Ave., N.W. Suite 200 
Washington, D.C. 20009 
William Gardner, Esq. 
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius 
1 1 1 1 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. 
Washington, D.C. 20004 
Counsel for Willa Perlmutter 
Barbara Van Gelder, Esq. 
Eric Lyttle, Esq. 
Wiley, Rein & Fielding LLP 
1776 K Street, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20006-2304 
and 
Erika C. Birg, Esq. 
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison 
1615 L Street, NW, Suite 1300 
Washington, DC 20036 
Counsel f o r James Eichncr 
Roger Zuckeman, Esq. 
Leslie Kiernan, Esq. 
William Taylor, Esq. 
Zuckerman, Spader, Goldstein, Taylor & 
Kolker, LLP 
1201 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Suite 700 
Washington, D.C. 20036 
Counsel for Robert Lamb and Hilda Manuel 
Chnstopher Mead, Esq. 
London & Mead 
1225 19th Street, N.W. Suite 320 
Washington, D.C. 20036 
Counsel for Ken Rossrnan 
Robert Luskin, Esq. 
Patton Boggs 
2550 M St., Suite 500 
Washington, D.C. 2003 7- 1350 
Counsel for Edward Cohen, Bruce Babbitt 
and John Leshy 
Plat0 Cacheris, Esq. 
John F. Hundley, Esq. 
Sydney J. Hoffhann, Esq. 
Baker & McKenzie 
8 15 Connecticut Avenue, N. W. 
Washington, D.C. 20006 
Counsel for John Berry and Glen Schumaker 
R. Christopher Cook, Esq. 
Jones Day Reaves & Pogue 
5 1 Louisiana Ave, N. W. 
Washington, D.C. 2000 1-2 I 13 
Counsel for Michael Carr 
Kathleen E. Voelker, Esq. 
1 10 1 Connecticut Avenue, N. W ., Suite 1000 
Washington, D.C. 20036 
Counsel for James Douglas 
Martha Rogers, Esq. 
Leon Rodriguez, Esq. 
Ober, Kaler, Grimes & Shiver 
1410 H Street, N.W., Suite 500 
Washington, D.C. 20005 
Counsel for Timothy Elliott 
- 2 - Herbert Fenster, Esq. 
Jane Ann Neiswender, Esq. 
Daniel G. Jarcho, Esq. 
McKenna, Long & Aldridge, LLP 
370 Seventeenth Street, Suite 4800 
Denver, Colorado 80202 
Counsel f o r Gale Norton 
James Johnson, Esq. 
Jamie Levitt, Esq. 
Morrison & Foerster 
1290 Sixth Avenue 
New York, NY 10104 
Counsel for Sabrina McCarthy 
E. Lawrence Barcella, Jr. 
Scharn Robinson, Esq. 
Paul, Hasting, Janofsky & Walker LLP 
1299 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. 
Washington, D.C. 20004-2400 
Counsel for William Myers 
Stephen M. Byers, Esq. 
Miguel Rodriguez, Esq. 
Crowell & Moring 
1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. 
Washington, D.C. 20004-2595 
Counsel for Dominic Nessi 
Elizabeth Wallace Fleming, Esq. 
Trout & Richards PLLC 
1100 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 730 
Washington, DC 20036 
Counsel for Michael Rossetti 
Jeffrey D. Robinson, Esq. 
Dwight Bostwick, Esq. 
Melissa McNiven, Esq. 
Baach, Robinson & Lewis 
One Thomas Circle, Suite 200 
Washington, D.C. 20005 
Counsel for Lois Schiffer and Anne Shields 
Steven J. Roman, Esq. 
John A. Gibbons, Esq. 
Dickstein, Shapiro, Morh & Oshinshy 
2101 L Street NW 
Washington, DC 20037-1 526 
Counsel for David Shilton and John Bryson 
Michael Goodstein, Esq. 
Deanna Chang, Esq. 
Resolution Law Group, P.C. 
5335 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 350 
Washington, D.C. 20015 
Counsel for Toin Clark 
Stanley Brand, Esq. 
Andrew D. Herman, Esq. 
Brand & Frulla 
923 Fifteenth Street, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20005 
Counsel for Peter Coppelman 
Hamilton P. Fox lTI, Esq. 
Kathleen M. Devereaux, Esq. 
Gregory S. Smith, Esq. 
Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan LLP 
1275 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. 
Washington, D.C. 20004-2415 
Counsel for Charles Findla)) 
Thomas E. Wilson, Esq. 
John A. Ordway, Esq. 
Berliner, Corcoran & Rowe, LLP 
1101 17th Street, N.W., Suite 1100 
Washington, D.C. 20036 
Counsel for John Most 
Larry A. Nathans, Esq. 
Robert W. Biddle, Esq. 
Bennett & Nathans, LLP 
210 East Lexington Street, Suite 301 
Baltimore, MD 21202 
Counsel for David Shuey 
- 3 - Eugene R. Fidell, Esq. 
Matthew S. Freedus, Esq. 
Feldesnian, Tucker, Leihr, Fidell & Bank 
LLP 
2001 L Street, N.W., 2nd Floor 
Washington, D.C. 20036 
Counsel for James Simon 
- 4 - 1-202-318-2372 From Geaffrey Rempel 2003-08-21 13 4 0 56 (GMI ) To. Page 1 of 6 
Case No.l:96CVO1285 (RCL) 
Special Master Balaran 1 
) 
1 
1 
1 
1 
IN 'THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
ELOIJISE PEPION COBETA+ et al., 
Plaintiffs 
V. 
GALE NORTON, Secretary 
Defendants 1 
1 
1 
) 
1 
NOTICE OF DEPOSITION and REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS 
To: Christopher Cook 
Jones Day 
51 Louisiana Avenue, N.W. 
Waslungton, D.C. 20002-21 13 
Attornev for Named Individual Michael Carr 
Mark E. Nagle 
Assistant IJ.S. Attorney 
Judiciary Center Building 
555 Fourth Street. NW, Room 10-403 
Waslungton, DC 2w01 
J. Cliri stopher Kohn 
United States Department of Justice 
Civil Division 
1100 L Street, NW, Room 10036 
Washington 1)c 2mos 
Attomevs for Defendants 
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on September 24,2003, at plaintiffs' counsel's offices, 
607 14" Street. 9Ih floor, Washington D.C. 20005, plaintiffs will take the deposition of Michael 
Can: aid 
This deposition will coinnience at 1O:OO a.m. and will continue from day to day until 
completed. Testimony will be recorded by stenographic means. 
EXHIBIT 1 
Defs' Motion to Quash Pltfs' Notice 
of Depo B R.F.P. re Michael Carr To Page 2 of 6 
deponent produce on or before September 22: 2003 the following docuinents related to the 
subject matter of the niotions for order to show cause, bills of particular, Interior Ofice of 
Inspector General investigations and draR interim and final reports, and the preliminary contempt 
proceedings (individually and collectively the Subject Matters) before Special Master Alan 
Balamn that are relevant to Named Individual Carr: 
1. 
2. 
3 . 
1-707-318-2372 From Geoffrey Rempel 2(103-0&21 13-4056 (GMT) 
PLEASE TAKE FURTIiEK NOTICE - Request is hereby made that defendants and the 
All documents, including memoranda., handwritten notes and marginalia, calendars, diaries 
(including Mr. Carrs green books if he used them), appointineiit books, schedulers, 
planners, Day-Timers, voice mail, emad, telephone records and the like, including without 
limitation all hard copy documents, and electronic documents housed in, or created on, 
computers or personal digital assistants, whether the computers are owned or leased by 
the government, its agents, emplovees, or Named Individual Can; and any drafts thereof, 
which documents show in whole or in part matters that relate to, refer to, or embody the 
Subject Matters whether any such references are direct or indirect and general or specific 
with respect to Named Individual Carr. 
All phonc logs (both incoming and outgoing), phone message books, voice mail, and 
telephone message slips, including without limitation all individual phone memoranda slips 
together with the duplicate carbon or carbonless originals contained in the phone message 
books thcnisclves (typically spiral bound), and all notes of teiephonc conversations 
maintained i n such logs, which documents relate to, refer to or embody the Subject 
Matter, whether any such references to the Subject Matters are direct, indirect, general or 
specific, and whether such rcfcrence telephone calls, whcthcr completed or not, placed to 
or made by Mi-. Can at any time relevant to the Subject Matters. 
All documents, whether in hard copy or electronic fonnat - including all memoranda 
voice mail. email. handwritten notes and marginalia - that relate to, refer to, or embody, 
directly or indirectly, generally or specifically, and illformal ur fonnal, disciplinary action, 
2 1-202-318-2372 From, Geoffrey Rempel M03-08-21 13.40:56 (GMT) To Page3of6 
threatened disciplinary action, investigations, examinations, assessments or adverse or 
critical performance reviews (Rofessional Evaluations) concerning Named Individual 
Can- and his conduct with respect to the Subject Matters, including without limitation the 
Office of Inspector General, Office of the Solicitor, Department of Justice, and all 
disciplinary action taken with respect thereto. 
4. All documents, whether in hard copy or electronic format, that relate to, refer to, or 
embody tlie time and charges of all personal counsel for Named Individual Carr, including 
all hourly rates, actual time billed and paid, all expises related thereto, the dates such bills 
were submitted for payment, the dates payments were made, and the realization 
percentage for all time subniitted and tendered for payment, and explanations, if any, for 
the governments deferment of fees or failure to pay 100% of time and charges submitted 
for payment to the defendants or tlie Department of Justice. However, this request does 
include the detailed description of specific professional services provided by personal 
counsel to Nanied Individual Carr in support of each such statement of time and charges. 
3 To Page4of6 
OF COUNSEL: 
JOHN ECHOHAWK 
Native American Rights Fund 
1506 Broadway 
Boulder, Colorado 80302 
August 2 1,2003 
1-202-318-2372 From. Geoffrey Rempel 2003-0821 13 40 56 (GMT) 
DENNIS M. GINGOLD 
D.C. Bar No. 417748 
MARK KESTER BROWN 
I3.C. Bar No. 470952 
GO7 14Ih Street., N.W. 
9th Floor 
Washiiigtos D.C. 20005 
KEITH M. HARPER 
D.C. Bar No. 451956 
Native American Rghts Fund 
1712N Street, NW 
Wadlington, DC 20036-2976 
Attornew for Plaintiffs 
4 1-202-318-2372 From. Geoffrey Rernpei 2003-08-21 13.40-56 (GMTI To PageSof6 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
I hereby Certify that 8 Copy Of the foregoing NOTICE OF DEPOSITION AND REQUEST FOR 
PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS was served on the following by US Mail or facsimile, pursuant to 
agreenient, on this day. August 21.2003. 
VIA FACSIMILE 
Mark E. Nagle 
Assistant IJ.S. Attorney 
Judiciary Center Building 
555 Fourth Street N.W. Room 10-403 
Washington, D. C. 2000 1 
202.5 14.8780 (fax) 
J. Christopher Kohn 
United States Department of Justice 
Civil hvision 
1100 L Street, N.W. Room 10036 
Waslungton, D.C. 20005 
202.5 14.9 1 63 (fax) 
Earl Old Person (Prose) 
Blackfeet Tribe 
P.O. Box 850 
Browning, M? 59417 
406.33 8.7530 ( fas) 
William Bnggs, Jr. 
Ross, Dison & Bell, LLP 
2001 K S t , W 
Washington, DC 20006 1 WO 
Camsel for Phil Rr-mk 
Kobcrt L u s h 
Patton Boggs, LLP 
2550 M St, NW 
Washington, DC 20037- i 350 
Cormsef for Bmce Babbitt, Ed Cohm 2003-OE21 13:40'56 (GMT) To' Page 6 of 6 
VIA US MAIL 
Cllristopher Cook 
Jones, Day, Kevis & Pogue 
51 Louisiana Avenue, NW 
Washington DC 2000 1-2 1 1 3 
Cowiselfor h.iicliael Carr 
Plato Cacheris 
Baker & Mckenzie 
81 5 Connecticut Avenue, NW 
Waslungton, MI: 20006-4078 
Counsel for J h i Ben y 
Amy Rerman Jackson 
Trout & Richards 
1350 Connecticut Avenue. Suite 1220 
Waslington, DC 20036 
Coraisel for Edfh Blackwell 
Greg Smith 
Sutheriand, Asbill 
1275 Pennsylvania Ave, NW 
Washington DC 20004 
Cocaisel for Clwles Findq 
Earl Silbert 
PI pe r, Rudiiic k 
1200 Nineteenth St, NW 
Waslington UC 20036 
Colnisel,for Sarah D. Hinmrelhocl? 
Koger Zuckeniian 
Zuckemian Spaeder 
1201 Connecticut Avenue 
Washington, DC 200362638 
Coioisel for Bob Lantb 
Jeffrey Robinson 
Baach Robinson & Lewis, PLLC 
One Thomas Circle, NW 
Waslingto14 DC 20005 
Suite 200 
Coutisel for 1,oi.Y Scliifler 
Larry Allen Nathans 
Bennett & Nathans LLP 
210 East Lexlngton St, Suite 301 
Baltimore. MD 21202 
Cuinisef. for- DmYdShq 
1-202-318-2372 From Geoffrey Rempel 
L. Barrett Boss 
Asbill, Junkin, Moffitt & Boss 
1615 New Hampshire Ave, NW 
Washington DC 20009 
Counsel for Stew S~~~mzson 
Kevin Cover 
Steptoe and Johnson 
1330 Connecticut Avenue, NW 
Washington, DC 20036 
Bradley S. Lui 
Morrison & Foerster 
2000 Pennsylvania Ave, NW 
Washngton, DC 20006- 1888 
CotaLsel for Sabrina McCarthy 
Dwight Rostwick 
Baach Kobinson & Lewis 
1 Thomas Circle, NU:, Suite 200 
Washington DC 20005 
Cotawel for Ame She/& 
6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 
~ 
ELOUISE PEPION COBELL, et al., 
Plaintiffs, 
V. 
GALE A. NORTON, et al., 
Defendants. 
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH 
FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 26(c) 
Dodge Wells, one of the attorneys for the Interior defendants, hereby certifies that he 
conferred with Dennis Gingold, counsel for plaintiffs, by telephone on September 9,2003 in a 
good-faith effort to resolve the issues raised by the foregoing motion for a protective order 
concerning the notice for the depositions of Michael Carr, and the he and Mr. Gingold have been 
unable to resolve the dispute. 
September 9,2003 
Dodge Wells 
Senior Trial Counsel 
D.C. Bar No. 425 194 
Commercial Litigation Branch 
Civil Division 
P.O. Box 261 
Ben Franklin Station 
Washington, D.C. 20044 
(202) 307-0407 
DATED: 
Civil Action No. 96-1285 (RCL) 
) 
1 
) 
1 
1 
) 
1 
(Special Master Alan L. Balaran) ) 
) 
) 
EXHIBIT 2 
Defs' Motion to Quash Pltfs' Notice 
of Depo & R.F.P. re Michael Cam 12023182372 From: Geoffrey Rernpel To: Page1 O f 3 
Deiiriis M Giigold 
P. 0. Ros I4464 
Wa~lutigton, D. C. ,700444464 
BY FACSIMILE 
December 4,2002 
Hon. Alan Balaran 
1717 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W 
Twelfth Floor 
Washington, D.C. 20006 
Re: Cobdl v. ,Vurtun, Civ. Action No. 1285 (RCL). Procedures and Schedule for 
Investigation Into Putative Contemnors Misconduct. 
Dear Mr. Balaran: 
By this letter, plaintiffs respectfully bring to your attention two matters regarding your 
investigation into the culpability of more than 39 putative contenmors. First, inasmuch as 
plaintiffs have conipleted the initial series oTBil1s of Particulars in accordance with your 
November 4,2002 Memorandum setting fortli the revised schedule,I it is now appropriate for 
plaintiffs to commence discovery to the extent their burden under Fed.R.Civ P. 12(b)(6) has been 
Accordingly, plaintiffs propose the submission of a preliminary list of potential witnesses 
for the Special Masters review along with a brief statenlent explaining why each witness should 
be deposed, as well as appropriate discovery requests critical to your complete and thorough 
investigation. 
Ihese Bills of Particulars were prepared in support Plaiiitiflsh40tioii For Order to 
Sliow Cause IF@ Interior Defeiabits. /tiid Tlgir Coiaael, SlzouldNot Be Ileld UI Civil And 
Crimiiial Coirtempt For- DcsR-oJ7ltg E-nmil(3/20!02) and detail each putative contemnors role in 
the destruction of federal records at the Office of the Solicitor. 
Plaintiffs respectfully note that the Special Masters November 4,2002 Memorandum 
revised the schcdule for the upcoming proceedings, it did not revise the Rules Governing the 
Investigative Process. See October 7,2002 Memorandum at 4-6. 
Id. at 4 (The Special Master will initially review plaintiffs bill of particulars and 
determine if the investigation should proceed with regard to a particular Named Individual and 
evaluate whether plaintiffs have stated a claim and whether the allegations, construed in a light 
most favorable to plaintiffs, constitute fraud on the court.) (footnotes omitted). 
41d. at 5 . 
Id. Plaintiffs reserve the right to supplement their request for discovery to the extent that 
EXHIBIT 3 
Defs Motion to Quash Pltfs Notice 
o f Depo & R.P.P. re Michael Cam 12023182372 From Geoffrey Rernpel To: 2002-12-04 15-22 49 (GMT) P a g e Z o f 3 
Second, plaintiffs note that you have scheduled May 1,2003 as the deadline or plaintiffs 
second series of Bills of Particulars; the same day that this Court has scheduled the opening of 
Trial 1.5. To be absolutely clear: it is impossible for plaintiffs to produce the requested Bills of 
Particulars and prepare concurrently for a major trial covering both retrospective and prospective 
aspects ofthis action. Moreover, this first series of Bills of Particulars has denionstrated that 
issues are capable of being segregated; indeed, the massive nature of these frauds militate strongly 
for parbtioning the issues into manageable segments and proceeding seriatim. Plaititiffs suggest 
that proceeding along the same lines as the Court in the second Contempt Trial is appropriate. 
For these reasons, plaintiffs respectfully request that the Specid Master permit the 
submission of Rills of Particulars with respect to Count 5, starting August 4, 2003.6 
Very truly yours, 
Demis M. Gingold 
cc: Hon. Joseph Kieffer, 111, Special Master-Monitor (via facsinde) 
All Counsel identified in Attachment A (via facsimile) 
6Plaintiffs propse that scheduling future counts may be best accomplished after the 
Master lias made his reports and reconmiendations regarding the destruction of electronic records 
and any future proceedings before the Court arc known. 
2 To: Page 3 o f 3 
L. BARREIT BOSS 
I 
I 
RUSSELL DUNCAN 
STEPHEN M. DYERS 
EUGENE R FIDELL 
MICHAEL BROMWICH 
CHRISTOPHER COOK 
CHRISTOPHER KOHN 
MARK NAGLE 
PLATO CACHERIS 
CHRISTOPHER MEAD 
B. MICHAEL RAUH 
, 
, 
HERBERT FENSTER 
fiRY-LOU SOLLER 
BRADLEY S. LUI 
MAR TF TA R OnCrER S 
ROBERT D LUSKIN 
E LAWRENCE BARCELLA, JR PAUL HATINGS. JANOFSKY & WALKER 
EARL SILBERT 
ELIZABETH W FLEMING 
MICHAEL D. GOODSTEIN 
WILLIAM H. BRIGGS, JR 
HAMILTON P. FOX, I11 
AMY BERhGW JACKSON 
BARBARA VAN GELDER 
DWIGHT P. ROSTWICK 
JEFFREY D. ROBINSON BMCH ROBINSON & LEWIS 
LARRY ALLEN NATHANS BENNETT & NATHANS LLP 
THOMAS E. WILSON BERLINEK CORCORAN & ROWE 
ALESSIODAVIDEVANGELISTA BEVERIDGE & DIAMOND, P.C. 
STANLEY M. BRAND 
ASBILL, JU", MOFFIIT & BOSS 
BMCH ROBINSON & LEWIS 
BRAND & FRULLA 
COBURN & SCHERTLER 
CROWELL & MOFUNG LLP 
FELDESMAN, TUCKER LEIFER, FIDELL & BANK 
FRIED, FRANK, HARRIS, SHRIVER & JACOBSON 
JONES DAY REVIS & POGUE 
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 
JUSTICE DEPARTh4ENT 
LAW OFFICES OF PLATO CACHERIS 
LONDON & MEAD 
MANA'IT. PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP 
MCKENNA & CUNEO, LLP 
MILLER & CHEVALIER 
MORRISON & FOERSTER 
ORER. KAJ.ER GRIMES & SHRIVER 
PATTON BOGGS, LLP 
PIPER RUDNICK, LLP 
PRESTON, GATES, ELLIS & ROUVELAS MEEDS 
RESOLUTION LAW GROUP, P C 
ROSS. DIXON & BELL, LLP 
SIJTHERLAND ASRII,I, & BRENNAN LLP 
TROUT & RICHARDS 
WILEY REIN & FIELDING LLP 
Z U C K E W SPAEDER 
ZUCKERMAN SPAEDER 
MORGAN. I.EWIS & ROCKIUS 
ROGER ZUCKERMAN 
LESLIE B. KIERNAN 
KEVIN GOVER 
KATHLEEN E VOELKER 
WII,I,IAM I, GARDNER 
12023182372 From' Geoffrey Rempel 2002-12-04 15'22'49 (GMT) 
ATTACHMENT A Dec-04-02 02:47 
LAW OFFICE 
from-THE LAW OFFICE @F ALAN BALARAN 
VIA FACSIMILE 
Dennis hil. Gingold, Esq. 
1275 Pemsylvaiiirt Ave., N.W. 
Ninth Floor 
Washingron. DC 20001 
Dsar Mr. Gingold: 
. .. . . 
2. 
. f \-\jI! ssume, for the last rimc, rhar my direction concerning the maniisr in which these 
. - - - L - ~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ l ~ .- .. , 3~ 10 '0s a&jrzsszd was nor clrar and rhar your refei-rnl 10 rhem as "purative 
conremnors" was an ovzrsighr. 
Dxeinber 4,3002 
RE: Cobell e t nl. v. Norcon er a]., Civil Action No. 96-1785 
This lerter responds to )'our correspondence of rhis date regarding rhe procedures that will 
goveni the jnvesriyation inro the conducl of the 59 Naiiied Individuals' : 
Any requests for additional rime to file lhe second set of Bills of Parriculars or to 
segregarc the issues therein will require the coiiseiiI of couiisel for the Named 
I'ndividuals or tlie inrenm1ion of rhz Court. 
bloiions for Orders 10 Show Causz 
~ l a i i %. i3zlaim 
SPECLIL MASTER 
EXHIBIT 4 
Defs' Motion to Quash Pltfs' Notice 
of Depo & R.F.P. re Michael CatT 
zozemm T-279 P 02/08 F-343 
1717 PENNWLVANIAAVE.. N.W 
TWELFTH FLOOR 
WASHINGTON. D C. 2fwO6 
TELEPHOM 1202) 466-501(8 
FAX (202) 986-8477 
E-MAIL &J~u@rrul~.cnm 
Procedures and Schedule for Invcsrigarion Inro Plain\iffs' T-279 P 03/09 F-343 2029860477 Oec-04-02 02:47 From-THE LAW OFFICE OF ALAN BALARAN 
DISTRlRUTlON 1.1s-r - VIA FIRST-CLASS POSTAGE 
Deiiiiis M. Gingold, Esq. 
Elliott Levitas, Esq. 
I275 Peiinsylvaiiid Av?., S.IV. 
Ninth Floor 
Waslington, DC 10004 
Tracy L. I-liimer, Esq. 
D o d g ~ Wells, Esq. 
Coiiiinircial Litigation Braiich/Civi 1 D ic.i si 011 
United Stares Dep2rtinenr of Justice 
P.O. Box 261 
Bcii Franklin Sratisn 
Washingon, D.C. 20044 
E. Lawrence Barcella, Jr., Esq. 
Paul, Hasrings, Janofsky s( Walker LLP 
7Yashing on, DC 3 1)003-2 40 0 
1299 Pcimsylvania Avsnuz, 1\3 W 
Barry Bass, Esq. 
Asbill, Jiiriliin. M ~ r ' i i t t 6: 20~s 
151 5 Neur Haniphirc Avenue, NW 
Suitc 200 
Washingron, DC 20009 
Dwighr Bostwick, Esq- 
Melissa McNivei, Esq. 
Baach, Robiiison 5( Lewis 
Olie Thomas Circle 
S&rc 200 
Washingon, DC 20005 
Sranley Brand, Esq. 
-4iir.l.rew D. Hennan, Esy. 
Grand & Frulla 
923 Fifrcenrli Street, W' 
Washingon, DC 30003 
l.;g-!l:!z:x H. Briggs, Jr., Esq. 
h!zc E. Rindnsr, Esq. 
Ross. Dixon EL Bell 
2001 I( Sweet, NW 
Wasliington, DC 20006- 1040 1-279 P 04/08 F-343 Doc-04-02 02:47 z o m 6 ~ 4 7 7 From-THE LAW @FFlCE @F ALAN BALARAN 
Michael Bromwich, Esq. 
Anne Perry, Esq. 
Fried Frank Harris Shriver k Jacobson 
1 GO 1 Pennsylvania Avenue, SW 
Wire SO0 
Washington, DC 20003-2505 
Sreve Byers, Esq. 
h,figuel Rodriguez, Esq. 
Crowell & Moring 
Waskingon, DC 20004-2595 
100 1 Pennsylvania Avenue, "8 
R . Chrisropher Cook, 'Esq. 
Joiics Day Rcaves B Pogue 
5 1 Louisiana Asenuc, N V 
Washington, DC 2000 1-3 11 3 
Riisscll D. Duncan, Esq. 
Coburn & Scha-der 
I I 50 I SJh Slrecr, NW 
Siiilc S50 
W a s h i n p n , DC 20036 
Herbert Fcnsrer, Esq. 
h4cKeniia Sr Cuneo, LL? 
1300 I< Sneer, NTV 
Wasliiii~~on, DC 20006 
Eugciie R. Fjde!!, Esq. 
b l d t t h w S. %rz?itus 
Feldesmaii, Tucker, Lei fur, Fidell & B;unlc, LLP 
200 1 L Strcer, NW 
Second FIoor 
Washingron, DC 30036 
Elia.bcrh Wallace Flzming, Esq. 
71 5 15" StreeI, NW 
Suire 35 
LVajhingrojI, DC 20009 Dec-04-02 02:47 2029068477 From-THE LAW OFFICE OF ALAN @ALAPAN 
Hamilton P. Fox, Ill, Esq. 
Kat hl e en M . 'Deveizaux 
Gregory S. Smith 
Sutherlaiid,.AdiIl Sr Brennsn, 1,I.P 
1275 Pennsylvania Avenuc. h?V 
Washington, DC 30004-241 5 
Bill Gardnrr, Esq. 
b-lorcpl, Lewis 6r Bockius 
11 11 Pennsylvania .4veiiue, :bl" 
Washingon, DC 20004 
Michael Goodsrcin, Esq. 
Deanna Chang, Esq. 
Resolution %aw Croup. P.C. 
5325 Wisconsin .qvenue, NW 
Suite 3SO 
'\Vrtshingron, DC 3001 5 
Kevin Gover, Esq. 
Steptoe and Jolmon, LLP 
Washington, DC 20036 
1530 CoiuieuicLit Avenue, 
John F. Hundley, Esq. 
S~dney .I. I-loffmann 
B&er SC hlcl<,-nzie 
8 1 5 Connecticut Avenue, NW 
Washingron, DC 20006 
Amy Beman Jackson, Esq. 
Trout B Richards 
1\00 Connecticut j\venuil, NU; 
Suite 730, 
WajhillgIon, DC 30036 
James Johsoii, Esq. 
Jamie Lesitt, Esq. 
,Morrison 6: Foersrer 
1230 SixTh Avenue 
Ycw York, ?W 101 01 
-4- 1-279 P 06/08 F-343 2029868411 Dec-04-02 02:47 
SuiLr 301 
From-THE LAW OFFICE OF ALAN BALARAN 
David S. Krakoff, Esq. 
Alessio D. Evangelisra 
Beveridge & Diamond, P.C. 
1350 I Street, NW 
Suiie 700 
Washingon, DC 20005-33 I 1 
Roberr Luskin, Esq. 
Patton B o ~ g s 
2550 M Srrccr. NW 
Suite 500 
Washington. DC 20037-1;5@ 
Clvistophzr Mcad, Esq. 
london & Mead 
1225 lYh Street, NW 
Suite 330 
Washingron, DC 20035 
Larry A. Yarhans, Esq. 
Roben W. Biddle 
Bcnnerr & Nathms, LLP 
2 10 East Lexingon Srreer 
Baltimore, MD 31202 
13. Michael R;idi, Esq. 
hf;wil\, P11elps Sr Phillips, LLP 
1501 kf Sireet, NW 
Suite 700 
Washingon, DC 20005 
Jcffrcy D. Robinson, Esq. 
Baach, Robinson 6: Lewis, PLLC 
Oiie Thomas CircIe, NW 
Washington, DC 20005 T-279 P 07/08 F-343 2029868477 Dec-04-02 02:48 
.. . . /-:.;?* 
From-THE LAW OFFICE OF ALAN PALAPAN 
Suite 500 
Washington, DC 30005 
Mary LOU Soller, Esq. 
Miller 6: Chevalier, Esq. 
655 15rh Srreer. NW 
Suire 900 
Washington, DC 20005 
Earl .I. Silbert, Esq. 
Roberr A. Salzmo, Ejq. 
Adam S. I-loffinyr, Esq. 
Piper 'Rudnick, LLP 
1200 19"' Street, NW 
7''' Floor 
Waslingon, DC 20036 
1;L'illittni Taylor, Esq. 
Leslie I<ieman, Esq. 
%ticksroian, Sp+dzr, Goidstein, Taylol- 6L KolI;er, LLI' 
1301 Connecticut Avenue, XVv' 
Suite 700 
CVa;hingtot?, DC 20036 
B x b m Van Gelder, Esq. 
.Wiley, Rein Sr Fielding, LLP 
1776 K Street, NW 
Washingron, DC 20006-3303 
Kathleen E. Voslksr, Esq. 
1 101 Connecticut Avenue, NVv? 
Sitile 1000 
Washington, DC 30036 
Thomas E. Wilson, Esq. 
301~1 A. Ordway 
Berliner, Corcoran 8( Rowe, LLP 
1 100 17'" Srrzet, NW 
Suire 1!00 
.. A? .,...=- 31. PC 20036 Dec-04-02 02:48 From-THE LAW OFFICE OF ALAN PALARAN 
Roger Zuckeman, Esq. 
Leslie ICieinm, Esq. 
Zuclterrnnn, Spadzr, Goldsrein, Tayh- Sr Kolker, L'LP 
1201 Connecticut Avenue, NW 
Suite 700 
Washingon, DC 20036 
2029E68477 T-279 P 08/08 F-343 
-7- MFH:'fH ilmer 
DJ: 145-7- I468 
Bv Facsimile (202)986-8477 
Alan L. Balaran, Esq. 
Special Master 
171 7 Pennsylvania Ave., NW 
12th Floor 
Washington, DC 20006 
Re: Cubeflv. Norton, Civ. Action No. 96-1285 (RCL) (D.D.C.) - 
Referral of Plaintiffs' October 19,2001 and March 20,2002 
Dear Mr. Balaran: 
Show Cause Motions 
On August 21,2003, we received the attachcd notice of deposition From plaintiffs' counsel 
purporting to require former Interior attorney Michael Carr to appear for deposition and further 
purporting to require defendants and Mr. Carr lo produce certain documents. See Attachnicnt I . As 
you know, Mr. Carr is one of the individuals named by plaintiffs in their October 19,2001 show cause 
motion, which thc Court referred to you on September 17,2002. The request for production states that 
it seeks "documents related to the subject matter of the motions for ordcr to show cause, bills of 
particular, lntcrior Office of Inspector General investigations and draft, interim and final reports, and 
the prcliminary contempt proceedings . . . before Special Master Alan Balaran that are relevant to 
Named Individual Carr." Attachment 1 at 2. Thus, it is clear that plaintiffs are seeking discovery in 
furtherance of their October 19,2001 show cause motion and the bills of particulars filed in 
supplementation of that motion. 
Plaintiffs' attempt to obtain discovery on this matter is unauthorized. Indeed, it is in dircct 
contravention of your detcmiination that discovery would not take place "[ulntil the report and 
recommendation issues regarding the legal sufficiency of the claims lodged against each of the Named 
Individuals. . . ," Dec. 4,2002 letter from Alan L. Bafaran, Special Master, to Dennis M. Gingold, 
counsel for plaintiffs (Attachment 2). We are also attaching for your convenience Mr. Gingold's 
December 4, 2002 letter Lo you in which he proposed initiating discovery, to which your letter of the 
same date replied. See Attachment 3. Besides your own determination that discovery would not 
commence in this matter before the issuance of your report and recommendation on the legal 
sufficiency of plaintiffs' allegations, the Court of Appeals' July 18, 2003 decision makes clear that 
there are potential criminal ramifications in this proceeding. See Cobeff t: Norton, 334 F.3d 1128, 
EXHIBIT 5 
Defs' Motion to Quash Pltfs' Notice 
ofDepo & R.F.P. re Mlchael Carr 
U.S. Department of Justice 
Civil Division 
BenjQmin Franklin Station 
Atty: Tracy L. Hifmet 
Tel: (202) 307-0474 
Post Oflce Bov 26 I 
Washingfon, D. C 20044 
August 28,2003 - 2 - 
1146 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (treating District Court's contempt citations on all specifications arising from 
plaintiffs' October 19,2001 show cause motion as "criminal in nature"). The Court of Appeals also 
made clear that anyone accused of criminal contempt - as the Named individuals here have been 
accused - - is entitled to the full measure of due process rights afforded in any criminal procecding. Id. 
at 1147. As we and private counsel for the Named Individuals have noted repeatedly, the Federal 
Rules of Criminal Procedure do not permit the sort of wide-ranging discovery that plaintiffs are again 
attempting to undertake with this notice of deposition and request for production of documents. 
The government hereby requests that you direct plaintiffs to withdraw the unauthorized requcst 
for production and notice of deposition to Mr. Carr. Moreover, plaintiffs' website stales that the Carr 
notice is the "first in a series." See Attachment 4. To avoid wasting further time responding to any 
additional unauthorized deposition notices or document production requests directed to Named 
Individuals, we ask you to affirm that the government and the Named Individuals need not respond to 
any discovery in this matter at this time. 
Thank you for your attention to this matter. 
Trial A t t d y 
Commercial Litigation Branch 
Attachments 
cc: Attached service list cc: 
By facsimile, pursuant to written agreement: 
Keith Harper, Esq. 
Native American Rights Fund 
1712 N Street, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20036-2976 
(202) 822-0068 
Counsel for Plaintfls 
Dennis M Gingold, Esq. 
Mark Kester Brown, Esq. 
607 - 14th Street, NW 
Box 6 
Washington, D.C. 20005 
(202) 3 18-2372 
Counsel for Plaintgs 
and by U.S. Mail upon: 
Elliott Levitas, Esq. 
1100 Peachtree Street, Suite 2800 
Atlanta, GA 30309-4530 
Counsel for Plaintiffs 
By email to: 
Mary Lou Solier, Esq. 
Adam Feinberg, Esq. 
Miller & Chevalier 
Washington, D.C. 20005 
Counsel for Chester Mills and Terence 
Adam Hofftnger, Esq. 
Piper Rudnick LLP 
1200 19th Street, N.W., 7th Floor, 
Washington, D.C. 20036 
Counsel for John Cruden, Jack Haugrud 
655 15th Street, N.W., Suite 900 
Virden 
Earl J. Silbert, Esq. 
Robert A. Salerno, Esq. 
and Sarah Himmelhoch 
David S. Krakoff, Esq. 
Alessio D. Evangelista 
Jamie Abrams 
Christine Stroop 
Beveridge & Diamond, P.C. 
1350 I Street, N.W. 
Suite 700 
Washington, D.C. 20005-33 1 1 
Counsel for Daryl White 
Amy Berman Jackson, Esq. 
Trout & Richards 
1 100 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. 
Suite 730 
Washington, D.C. 20036 
Counsel for Edith Blackwell 
- 1 - William H. Briggs, Jr., Esq. 
Marc E. Rindner, Esq. 
Ross, Dixon & Bell 
2001 K Street, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20006-1040 
Counsel for Phillip Brooks 
Michael Bromwich, Esq. 
Anne Perry, Esq. 
Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson 
1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. 
Suite 800 
Washington, D.C. 20004-2505 
Counsel for Sharon Blackwell 
B. Michael Rauh, Esq. 
Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP 
I501 M Street, N.W. 
Suite 700 
Washington, D.C. 20005 
Counsel for Neal McCaleb 
Bany Boss, Esq. 
Asbill, Junkin, Moffitt & Boss 
1615 New Hampshire Ave., N.W. 
Suite 200 
Washington, D.C. 20009 
Counsel for Stephen Swanson 
William Gardner, Esq. 
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius 
1 11 1 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20004 
Counsel for Willa Perlmutter 
Barbara Van Gelder, Esq. 
Eric Lyttle, Esq. 
Wiley, Rein & Fielding LLP 
1776 K Street, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20006-2304 
and 
Erika C. Birg, Esq. 
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison 
1615 L Street, NW, Suite 1300 
Washington, DC 20036 
Counsel for James Eichner 
Roger Zuckerman, Esq. 
Leslie Kieman, Esq. 
William Taylor, Esq. 
Zuckerman, Spader, Goldstein, Taylor & 
Kolker, LLP 
120 1 Connecticut Avenue, N. W. 
Suite 700 
Washington, D.C. 20036 
Counsel for Robert Lamb and Hilda Manuel 
Christopher Mead, Esq. 
London & Mead 
1225 19th Street, N.W. 
Suite 320 
Washington, D.C. 20036 
Counsel for Ken Rossman 
Robert Luskin, Esq. 
David Tafairi, Esq. 
Patton Boggs 
2550 M St., Suite 500 
Washington, D.C. 20037-1350 
Counsel for Edward Cohen, Bruce Babbitt 
and John Leshy 
Plat0 Cacheris, Esq. 
John F. Hundley, Esq. 
Sydney J. Hoffmann, Esq. 
Baker & McKenzie 
8 1 5 Connecticut Avenue, N. W. 
Washington, D.C. 20006 
Counsel for John Berry and Glen Schumaker 
- 2 - R. Christopher Cook, Esq. 
Jones Day Reaves & Pogue 
5 1 Louisiana Ave, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 2000 1-2 1 1 3 
Counsel for Michael Carr 
Kathleen E. Voelker, Esq. 
1101 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 1000 
Washington, D.C. 20036 
Counsel for James Douglas 
Martha Rogers, Esq. 
Leon Rodriguez, Esq. 
Ober, Kaler, Grimes & Shriver 
1410 H Street, N.W., Suite 500 
Washington, D.C. 20005 
Counsel for Timothy Elliott 
Herbert Fenster, Esq. 
Jane Ann Neiswender, Esq. 
Daniel G. Jarcho, Esq. 
McKenna, Long & Aldridge, LLP 
370 Seventeenth Street, Suite 4800 
Denver, Colorado 80202 
Counsel for Gale Norton 
James Johnson, Esq. 
Jamie Levitt, Esq. 
Morrison & Foerster 
1290 Sixth Avenue 
New York, NY 10104 
Counsel for Sabrina McCarthy 
E. Lawrence Barcella, Jr. 
Scharn Robinson, Esq. 
Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP 
1299 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. 
Washington, D.C. 20004-2400 
Counsel for William Myers 
Stephen M. Byers, Esq. 
Miguel Rodriguez, Esq. 
Crowell & Moring 
1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20004-2595 
Counsel for Dominic Nessi 
Elizabeth Wallace Fleming, Esq. 
Trout & Richards PLLC 
1100 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 730 
Washington, DC 20036 
Counsel for Michael Rossetti 
Jeffrey D. Robinson, Esq. 
Dwight Bostwick, Esq. 
Melissa McNiven, Esq. 
Baach, Robinson 2% Lewis 
One Thomas Circle, Suite 200 
Washington, D.C. 20005 
Counsel for Lois Schiffer and Anne Shields 
Steven J. Roman, Esq. 
John A. Gibbons, Esq. 
Dickstein, Shapiro, Motin & Oshinshy 
2101 L Street NW 
Washington, DC 20037-1526 
Counsel for David Shilton and John Bryson 
Michael Goodstein, Esq. 
Deanna Chang, Esq. 
Resolution Law Group, P.C. 
5335 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 350 
Washington, D.C. 20015 
Counsel for Tom Clark 
Stanley Brand, Esq. 
Andrew D. Herman, Esq. 
Brand & Frulla 
923 Fifteenth Street, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20005 
Counsel for Peler Coppelman 
- 3 - Hamilton P. Fox 111, Esq. 
Kathleen M. Devereaux, Esq. 
Gregory S. Smith, Esq. 
Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan LLP 
1275 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20004-241 5 
Counsel for Charles Findlay 
Thomas E. Wilson, Esq. 
John A. Ordway, Esq. 
Berliner, Corcoran & Rowe, LLP 
1101 17th Street, N.W., Suite 1100 
Washington, D.C. 20036 
Counsel for John Most 
Larry A. Nathans, Esq. 
Robert W. Biddle, Esq. 
Bennett & Nathans, LLP 
120 East Baltimore Street, Suite 1800 
Baltimore, MD 2 1202 
Counsel for David Shuey 
Eugene R. Fidell, Esq. 
Matthew S. Freedus, Esq. 
Feldesman, Tucker, Leifur, Fidell & Bank LLP 
2001 L Street, N.W., 2nd Floor 
Washington, D.C. 20036 
Counsel for James Simon 
- 4 - I 
TX/RX NO 
PGS . 
TX/RX INCOMPLETE 
TRAVSACTION OK 
08/28/2003 14:26 FAX 2023533565 
, 
ERROR INFORMATION 
FROM 
SEXT BY: 
DATE: 
Repartment of Justice 
Civil Division 
Voice NO. (202) 616-9668 
TO: 
FAX No. 
NUMBER OF PAGES SENT (INCLUDING COVER PAGE): 27 
Hilnter 08-28-03 to Balman re PI+ 08-21-03 Notice of Carp Depo 
IMPORTANT: This facsirzlile is intended only for the ut ofthe individual or eutity to whch it is addressed. It m y 
contain information that is privileged, confidential, or athawise protected from disclosure under applicable law. I f 
thc reader of this trsnsmission is oot the intended recipient [IT the employee or agenc responsible for delivering thc 
transmission to the intended rrcipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying or use of 
rhis @anS&Shn or its conlenoi stricdv orohibited. T f vnii have rweiwri thic t-~m;-~;-. i- --- ..I---- --L.=---- 
Fax No. 
Kevin Kingston 
Law Clerk 
Labat-Aiiderson, Lnc. 
August 28,2003 
Allan Balaran Keith Havet Dennis M. Gingold 
(202) 986-8477 (202) 322-0068 (202) 3 18-2372 
a001 COBELL-LIDIUKY 
1 
$ * * * 8 8 * % * 8 * * * * * $ * * * 8 * ~ ~ ~ ~ * $ ~ * * 
$t* s8* MITLTI TX/RX REPORT 
s*x*88**8*****P8************** 
2218 
_ _ 
27 
~ 
(1) 99868477 
( 2 ) 98220088 
( 3 ) 93182372 
(202) 353-3565 08/26/03 17:03 F M 402 626 1700 --. _ - 
* = .. . 
WABHINOTON, D.C. 20991-211d 
TELEPHONEt 209-879-3199 * $hCSlMlLEr ;LOP-626-1 706 
. Via FacSimile and US. Mail 
De$nis M. *gold, Bsq. 
n!tark K Brow% h- 
WashhgtoqDC 20005 
607 14m St. NW, Box 6 
&Ce 
Rt: Cobdl v. Norton, Case No. 96437-1285 
Dear Mtssrs. Harper and Gingold:. 
On August 21,2003 you posted to the Intanet a Natica of Deposition and R q e t for 
Productian of Doc- addressed to m y client, Michacl Cam. I have not yet received a 
wpy of this docluncnt 
I attach to this lettcr the Recember 4,2002 let& of Special Master Alan L. Balaran to 
you inwbich the Special Mastcr advises you: TJd the report and remmm&tion k e s 
regarding thefegal sufiicicncy of the claims Iodged against each of the Named Individuals 
[including Mr. CarrJ, no discovery will commenc~. 
Accordingly, I demand that you withdraw the purported notice of deposition and request 
for pMduction of documents against Mt. Can. I fiuther demand tbat you remove that document 
fiam the Intemct. pltase advise me immediately whether you will comply with these demands. 
lf you do not withdraw this discovery, plaasa explain why your actions do not violate the Spwid 
Masters Decemba 4,2003 iastructionS to yo= 
cc: Counsel of Record 
Special Master Alan t. Balaran 
. 
R. Chistopher Cook 
EXHIBIT 6 
@002 JONES, DAY . ~- -.- 
JONES DAY 
51 LOUISIANA AVENUE. N.W. 
August 25.2003 
Defs Motion to Quash Pltfs Notice 
ofDepo &L R.F.P. re Michael Cam Dzernber 4,2002 
1 
RE; 
Until thr rqon ar.d rccornmsirdation issocs regadiag rltc kgaldlicicncy d r h e 
c!sims lodged rQiris: each of rht Named Tndividuals, no discowry will 
cornrncncc, 
h y mquesrs for addidanal time to i l e &: second set oCBillr of Particulars or to 
sqrogarc the issues herein will require the consent of cowel for the Nmed 
lndividdrtala or the inrenmion of the C o w 
(c M&- 
cc: Sandra Spmnu, Eq. 
2. 
Anached Disrriburion List 
T-270 ? 02/08 F-343 SllleMap Overview Documents 
Accounting long overdue for Indian trust 
funds 
When I went to Washington on a hot, sultry June 
day in 1996 to file a lawsuit over the billions of 
dollars of trust funds that the government had 
lost, misplaced and otherwise grossly 
mismanaged for hundreds of thousands of 
American Indians, I had no idea I would still be in 
court seven years later. 
Yet today, after three Cabinet secretaries have 
been held in contempt by a federal judge and 
after four lengthy trials and a successful defense 
on appeal of our claims on the merits, the federal 
government has failed to clean up the trust 
records. It cannot certify the accuracy of a single 
one of the estimated 500,000 current individual 
Indian trust accounts. 
That's the sad bottom line on how the federal 
government has continued to treat the nation's 
first citizens. 
All I and three other Indians are asking the 
government to do is account for the tens of 
millions of acres of land the government forced 
into trust and to account for and distribute -- to the 
proper trust beneficiaries -- the correct amount of 
funds it received and invested from the leases it 
arranged for timber sales and for oil, gas, 
minerals and grazing rights on Indian trust lands 
in the West. 
1 may not be a lawyer, but I was a small-town 
banker in Montana. I know that the most basic of 
duties of any trustee is to account for all trust 
assets, including the funds they hold for the 
beneficiaries. 
Unfortunately, the commissioner of the Bureau of 
Public Debt, a senior Treasury Department 
official, testified in our case that the United States 
has used our trust funds to reduce the national 
debt. 
But no one knows how much of our money was 
used to reduce the debt load of this country or 
how many years the US. government used our 
trust money for these and other important 
government purposes, such as building dams and 
major power projects in the West. 
We hope an accounting will finally tell the true 
story of how the government has used Individual 
Indian Trust funds for more than 100 years. And, 
we also hope that we will learn what really 
happened to 40 million acres of Individual Indian 
http://www.indiantrust.com/Tuesday, September 09,2003 at 3:01:51 PM, Page 1 of 4 
&i H o r n I Privacy Policy Enter your email address below to 
receive Indian Trust updates by email. 
Tuesday, September 09 2003 
_ _ _ _ ~ 
~ 
~~ ~~ 
~~ 
S 
your ernail here ... 
Plaintiffs' Opposition. Plaintiffs oppose Norton conditional ______ motion for ~~ additional 
f i e __ to file opening appeals brief. ri- 
09/04 Plaintiffs Subpoena. Plaintiffs subpoena DOJ attorney Spooner regarding 
misrepresentatiome ~___._~~______ to the Court with respect to the deposition of Donna 
ade ____ totheourt with respect to the d e p o s m D o n n a 
_ _ _ _ _ _ ~ ~ 
____~______ ~ 
~ ~ _ _ _ 
-~ _ _ ~ 
~ . -~ 
~ 
Bs 
09/04 Plaintiffs Subpoena. Plaintiffs subpoena DOJ attorney Quinn regarding 
misrep 
~- Plaintiffs ~ Subpoena. Plaintiffs subpoena DOJ attorney Petrie regarding 
misrepresentations ~~ made the CTwithrespect ~- to the deposition of Donna 
09/03 Plaintiffs Notice. Plaintiffs provide the Court notice of the Master's Navajo 
___ Report insupFo~ of Trial 1.5 Findings a 
09/02 Plaintiffs' Petition for Rehearing En Banc. Plaintiffs petition the Court of 
Appeals .___ to reinstate the contempt judgment against Norton. 
procedural order. a ZES 
Plaintiffs' Opposition. Plaintiffs oppose Citizen Norton's motion - _ _ _ ~ to vacate 
09/02 INDIANS ASK COURT TO REINSTATE CONTEMPT FINDING AGAINST 
A Betrayal of Trust Land-lease deal with U.S. is a trail of ~~ broken promises 
08/31 Indian leases still a scandal 
08/31 Attorneys are getting rich, at your expense ~- 
0910 1 Accounting long overdue for Indian trust funds 
08/27 Plaintiffs' Comments. Plaintiffs provide their response to Norton's information -- 
Contact 
09104 
Erwin. 
~ 
09/04 
~ 
08/29 
0813 1 ______ 
~ -___ 
- 
~ 
08/22 
t e c h n o l o ~ E a t ~ o ~ ~ c c o r d a n c e with the C o ~ P ~ m i n a r y 
_______ ~ 
~ 
~ 
~~ 
08/27 The great American land row American Indians are embroiled in a $137bn 
I a w m t h T U S CoGKent over land ~~ royalties. _______ Thesaga, w h m b e e n 
going on for seven years, rests ~ on a judge's decision, which is expected _. 
50rtly. 
~ ~ 
~~ 
Plaintiffs' Opposition. Plaintiffs oppose _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ Norton's motion to voluntarily dismiss 
her appeal. ~2 292 I KBS 
Anson -_____ Baker, 08/2 1 ________~ Plaintiffs Notice. Plaintiffs notice ~ former-Navajo - -. Appraisal chief, ~ 
f 
______ - ____ 
____________ 
____________ 
-~ _~ 
~~ - _____ 
115 8 KBs 
08/21 Plaintiffs' Motion. Plaintiffs move to adopt the Master's report regarding 
d fiduciary duty with respect to the undervaluation 
08/21 Plaintiffs Notice. Plaintiffs notice Michael Carr for deposition; first in a series of 
n m n d m u a l s to ~~ appearin C o X ~ O E i i laintiffs' contempt rnotions- ~ 
charging fraud and violations ~ of ~- court orders. 
0812 1 Report Finds Oil Firms Paid Indians Less for Land - 
08/21 Investigation finds that Navajo landowners are underpaid for land rights ~ _ _ _ _ _ ~ ~- 
EXHIBIT 7 
Defs' Motion to Quash Pltfs' Notice 
ofDepo & K.F.P re Michael Cam ~~ 
08/20 COURT OFFICIAL FINDS SECRETARY NORTONIJN VIOLATION OF LAW 
AND BREACH OF TRUST DUTIES TO NAVAJO 
Trust land that simply vanished, according to the 
testimony of the head of Interior's Office of 
Historical Accounting. 
08/20 Special Master Report and Recommendation. Master finds violations ~_ of law 
and - court orders ~~ i n ~ Navajo area appraisals. 
08/20 Court Order. ~~~ Court orders Master Navajo report to be filed in the puybli 
Seven years later, Interior Secretary Gale Norton, 
the government's trustee-delegate for the nation's 
first citizens, has done nothing to provide us 
answers to this and other important trust 
accounting issues. 
~ 0811 8 Plaintiffs' Opposition. Plaintiffs oppose Norton's motion to disqualify the Special -~ 
0811 8 Plaintiffs' Opposition. Plaintiffs oppose Norton motion to suppress information 
implicXng White House involvement in suppressingtestimony before 
____ Congress T-- . 
Why the delay? Why the deception? Why the 
disdain for the obligations Norton owes to 
hundreds of thousands of Individual Indian Trust 
beneficiaries, many of whom live in Washington 
state? 
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and others have said 
it's because Indians lack political clout in the 
nation's capital. Any other interest group would 
have had this problem resolved immediately, 
McCain has said. There is no dispute about the 
evidence. Study after study has warned Congress 
that our trust funds were being horribly managed 
by the Department of Interior. Billions of dollars 
are missing. 
In 1989, the Senate Special Committee on 
Investigations found that "fraud and corruption 
pervade" the Interior Department. The General 
Accounting Office warned both Republican and 
Democratic administrations for years that this is a 
very serious problem. 
In 1994, Congress ordered Interior to account for 
the missing funds. Nothing happened. 
So we Indians did what others similarly situated 
would have done. We turned to the courts for help 
to straighten out an obdurate and dishonest 
executive and an uninterested Congress. 
Since we filed our suit, we have won several 
significant victories. In 1999, US. District Judge 
Royce Lamberth declared the government 
breached its trust responsibilities to us and 
ordered the interior secretary and the treasury 
secretary to provide us a complete accounting of 
all trust assets, including the revenues generated 
from our trust lands since the creation of the 
Individual Indian Trust in 1887. The US. Court of 
Appeals for the District of Columbia unanimously 
agreed with Lamberth and found that the interior 
secretary had engaged in "malfeasance" and has 
unduly delayed the accounting, causing 
irreparable harm to all of us. 
The government's record as trustee for Indians is 
"a long and sorry story," Lamberth declared. " ... It 
is fiscal and governmental irresponsibility in its 
purest form." 
Tough words, to be sure -- but they are utterly 
meaningless unless Norton is compelled to do 
what she is required to do by law. 
http://www.indiantrust.com/ Tuesday, September 09, 2003 at 3:01:51 PM, Page 2 of 4 Continuing to rely on the good faith of the interior 
secretary is an exercise in futility. 
There is enough wrongdoing, malfeasance and 
incompetence in the way the Department of 
Interior has handled our monies to fill a thousand 
accounting school and law school textbooks, the 
courts agreed. 
Records have been, and continue to be, lost, 
systematically destroyed, corrupted and, in many 
cases, never kept. In short, the government has 
no idea what the proper balances in our trust 
accounts should be. It doesn't know how many 
trust beneficiaries there were in the first place and 
it doesn't know how many trust accounts it should 
be managing today. 
It has admitted, however, that at least $1 3 billion 
in nominal dollars has been collected from 
Individual Indian Trust lands. But it doesn't know 
what happened to this money or the compound 
interest this money was earning for generations. 
And remember these are accounts the 
government created for some of the poorest 
Americans. We Indians had no choice in the 
matter. The government unilaterally decided we 
were incompetent to handle our own funds and 
created the trust in 1887. 
Would anyone in his right mind voluntarily give his 
or her life savings to unqualified bureaucrats and 
political appointees in Washington, D.C? Never! 
What has stunned me is the steadfast resistance 
and hostility of Democrats and Republicans alike, 
first to our lawsuit and then to the rulings, now 
numbering more than 50, that we have won. 
As our victories in court have increased, so has 
the government's resistance and open hostility to 
a just and fair resolution. What are they afraid of? 
Exposure of another Teapot Dome scandal? 
After concluding another trial -- 44 days -- in July 
on accounting and trust rehabilitation issues, we 
are moving closer to the long-overdue 
accounting, the government seems to be, pardon 
the cliche, circling the wagons. Every ruling 
reinforcing the trust obligations of the United 
States to us trust beneficiaries is ignored -- 
whether the rulings are made by the trial court, 
the appellate court or the US. Supreme Court. As 
Lamberth lamented, "this is not our form of 
government." 
We can settle this case, but the government first 
must participate in settlement talks with integrity, 
something they have refused to do for the seven 
years this case has been litigated. 
It must stop hiding behind disingenuous excuses, 
defending the indefensible and protecting 
incompetent and dishonest officials. 
http://www.indiantrust.com/ Tuesday, September 09,2003 at 3:01:51 PM, Page 3 of 4 Any settlement must be fair and just to make 
Indians whole for monies that have been 
collected by the United States for 116 years. 
It is, after all, our money. It is our property right. 
Home I Privacy Policy 1 Site Map 
Copyright 02003 Blackfeet Reservation Development Fund, Inc. All rights reserved. 
Developed by www.gslso1utions.com. 
http://www.indiantrust.com/ Tuesday, September 09,2003 at 3:01:51 PM, Page 4 of 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
I declare under penalty of perjury that, on September 10, 2003, I served the foregoing 
Interior Defendants' Motion for Protective Order and Motion to Quash Plainti@' Notice of 
Deposition and Request for Production of Documents Directed to Non-Party Michael Carr and 
Defendants; and Defendants Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Interior 
Defendants' Motion for Protective Order and Motion to Quash Plainti@' Notice of Deposition 
and Request for Production of Documents Directed To Non-Party Michael Carr and Defendants; 
and Proposed Report and Recommendation of Special Master Concerning Interior Defendants' 
Motion for Protective Order and Motion to Quash Plaintifls' Notice of Deposition and Request 
for Production of Documents Directed to Non-Party Michael Carr and Defendants in the manner 
stated upon the persons listed on the attached service list. By U.S. Mail and by facsimile: 
Alan L. Balaran, Esq. 
Special Master 
1 7 17 Pennsylvania Ave., NW 
12th Floor 
Washington, DC 20006 
(202) 986-8477 
By facsimile, pursuant to written agreement: 
Keith Harper, Esq. 
Native American Rights Fund 
1712 N Street, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20036-2976 
(202) 822-0068 
Counsel for Plaint@s 
Dennis M Gingold, Esq. 
Mark Kester Brown, Esq. 
607 - 14th Street, NW 
Box 6 
Washington, D.C. 20005 
(202) 3 18-2372 
Counsel for Plaintiffs 
and by US. Mail upon: 
Elliott Levitas, Esq. 
1100 Peachtree Street, Suite 2800 
Atlanta, GA 30309-4530 
Counsel for Plaiutffs 
Earl Old Person (Pro se) 
Blackfeet Tribe 
P.O. Box 850 
Browning, MT 5941 7 
(406) 338-7530 
By first-class mail, postage prepaid, and/or 
by facsimile or ernail pursuant to written 
agreement: 
Mary Lou Soller, Esq. 
Adam Feinberg, Esq. 
Miller & Chevalier 
655 15th Street, N.W., Suite 900 
Washington, D.C. 20005 
By First Class Mail 
Counsel for Chester Mills and Terence 
Virden 
Earl J. Silbert, Esq. 
Robert A. Salerno, Esq. 
Adam Hoffnger, Esq. 
Piper Rudnick LLP 
1200 19th Street, N.W., 7th Floor, 
Washington, D.C. 20036 
By Email to: 
robert .salerno@piperdnick.com 
By Email to: 
adam. ho ffinger@piperdnic k. corn 
Counsel for John Cruden, Jack Huugrud 
By Email to: earl.silbert@piperrudnick.com 
and Suruh Hinzrnelhoch 
David S. Krakoff, Esq. 
Alcssio D. Evangelista 
Jamie Abrams 
Christine Stroop 
Beveridge & Diamond, P.C. 
1350 I Street, N.W. 
Suite 700 
Washington, D.C. 20005-33 11 
By Email to: dkrakoff@bdlaw.com 
By Email to: aevangelista@bdlaw.com 
By Email to: jabrams@bdlaw.com 
By Email to: cstroop@bdlaw.com 
Counsel for Daryl White 
- 1 - Amy Berman Jackson, Esq. 
Trout & Richards 
1350 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. 
Suite 1220 
Washington, D.C. 20036 
By Email to: abj@troutrichards.com 
Counsel f o r Edith Blackwell 
Michael Bromwich, Esq. 
Anne Perry, Esq. 
Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson 
100 1 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. 
Suite 800 
Washington, D.C. 20004-2505 
By Email to: 
Michael-Bromwich@ffhsj .corn 
By Email to: perryan@ffhsj .com 
Counsel for Sharon Blackwell 
B. Michael Rauh, Esq. 
Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP 
1501 M Street, N.W. 
Suite 700 
Washington, D.C. 20005 
By Email to: mrauh@manatt.com 
Counsel for Neal McCaleb 
Barry Boss, Esq. 
Asbill, Junkin, Moffitt & Boss 
1615 New Hampshire Ave., N.W. 
Suite 200 
Washington, D.C. 20009 
By Fax: 202-332-6480 
Counsel for Stephen Swanson 
William Gardner, Esq. 
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius 
1 1 1 1 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. 
Washington, D.C. 20004 
By Fax: 202-739-3001 
Counsel for Willa Perlmutter 
William H. Briggs, Jr., Esq. 
Marc E. Rindner, Esq. 
Ross, Dixon & Bell 
2001 K Street, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20006-1040 
By Email to: bbriggs@rdblaw.com 
By Email to: mrindner@rdblaw.com 
Counsel for Phillip Brooks 
Barbara Van Gelder, Esq. 
Eric Lyttle, Esq. 
Wiley, Rein & Fielding LLP 
1776 K Street, N.W. 
Washington, D. C . 20006-2 3 04 
By Fax: 202-7 19-7049 
and 
Erika C. Birg, Esq. 
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison 
1615 L Street, NW, Suite 1300 
Washington, DC 20036 
By Email to: ebirg@paulweiss.com 
Counsel for James Eichner 
Roger Zuckerman, Esq. 
Leslie Kiernan, Esq. 
William Taylor, Esq. 
Zuckerman, Spader, Goldstein, Taylor & 
Kolker, LLP 
1201 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. 
Suite 700 
Washington, D.C. 20036 
By First Class Mail 
Counsel for Robert Lamb and Hilda Manuel 
Christopher Mead, Esq. 
London & Mead 
1225 19th Street, N.W. 
Suite 320 
Washington, D.C. 20036 
By Fax: 202-785-4280 
Counsel for Ken Rossman 
- 2 - Robert Luskin, Esq. 
Patton Boggs 
2550 M St., Suite 500 
Washington, D.C. 20037-1350 
By Email to: RLuskin@PattonBoggs.com 
Counsel for Edward Cohen, Bruce Babbitt 
and John Leshy 
Plat0 Cacheris, Esq. 
John F. Hundley, Esq. 
Sydney J. Hoffmann, Esq. 
Baker & McKenzie 
815 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20006 
By Email to: 
caro1yn.j .coffman@bakernet.com 
By Email to: svdnevhoffinan@,aol.com 
Counsel for John Bery and Glen Schumaker 
R. Christopher Cook, Esq. 
Jones Day Reaves & Pogue 
5 1 Louisiana Ave, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20001-21 13 
By Email to: 
christophercook@JonesDay.com 
Counsel for Michael Carr 
Kathleen E. Voelker, Esq. 
1101 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 1000 
Washington, D.C. 20036 
By Email to: kathleenvoelker@!aol.com 
Counsel for James Douglas 
Martha Rogers, Esq. 
Leon Rodriguez, Esq. 
Ober, Kaler, Grimes & Shriver 
1410 H Street, N.W., Suite 500 
Washington, D.C. 20005 
By Email to: mprogers@ober.com 
By Email to: lrodriguez@ober.com 
Counsel for Timothy Elliott 
Herbert Fenster, Esq. 
Jane Ann Neiswender, Esq. 
Daniel G. Jarcho, Esq. 
McKenna, Long & Aldridge, LLP 
370 Seventeenth Street, Suite 4800 
Denver, Colorado 80202 
By Email to: hfenster@mckennalong.com 
By Email to: 
jneiswender@mckennalong.com 
By Email to: djarcho@mckennalong.com 
Counsel for Gale Norton 
James Johnson, Esq. 
Jamie Levitt, Esq. 
Momson & Foerster 
1290 Sixth Avenue 
New York, NY 10 104 
By Email to: jamesjohnson@mofo.com 
By Email to: jlevitt@mofo.com 
Counsel for Sabrina McCarthy 
E. Lawrence Barcella, Jr. 
Scharn Robinson, Esq. 
Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP 
1299 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20004-2400 
By Fax: 202-508-9700 
Counsel for William Myers 
Stephen M. Byers, Esq. 
Miguel Rodriguez, Esq. 
Crowell & Moring 
100 1 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. 
Washington, D.C. 20004-2595 
By Email to: sbyers@crowell.com 
By Email to: mrodriguez@crowell.com 
Counsel for Dominic Nessi 
Elizabeth Wallace Fleming, Esq. 
Trout & Richards PLLC 
1350 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 1220 
Washington, DC 20036 
By First Class Mail 
Counsel for Michael Rossetti 
- 3 - Jeffrey D. Robinson, Esq. 
Dwight Bostwick, Esq. 
Melissa McNiven, Esq. 
Baach, Robinson & Lewis 
One Thomas Circle, Suite 200 
Washington, D.C. 20005 
By Email to: jeffrey.robinson@baachrobinson.com 
By Email to: dwightbostwich@baachrobinson.com 
By Email to: melissa.mcniven@baachrobinson.com 
Counsel for Lois Schiffer and Anne Shields 
Steven J. Roman, Esq. 
John A. Gibbons, Esq. 
Dickstein, Shapiro, Morin & Oshinshy 
2101 L Street NW 
Washington, DC 2003 7- 1526 
By Email to: romanS@dsmo.com 
By Email to: gibbonsj@dsmo.com 
Counsel for David Shilton und John Bryson 
Michael Goodstein, Esq. 
Deanna Chang, Esq. 
Resolution Law Group, P.C. 
5335 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 350 
Washington, D.C. 2001 5 
By Fax: 202-686-4843 
Counsel for Tom Clark 
Stanley Brand, Esq. 
Andrew D. Herman, Esq. 
Brand & Frulla 
923 Fifteenth Street, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20005 
By First Class Mail 
Counsel for Peter Coppelmun 
Hamilton P. Fox ILI, Esq. 
Kathleen M. Devereaux, Esq. 
Gregory S. Smith, Esq. 
Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan LLP 
1275 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W. 
Washington, D.C. 20004-241 5 
By Fax: 202-637-3593 
Counsel for Charles Firidluy 
Thomas E. Wilson, Esq. 
John A. Ordway, Esq. 
Berliner, Corcoran & Rowe, LLP 
1101 17th Street, N.W., Suite 1100 
Washington, D.C. 20036 
By Email to: bjones@bcr-dc.com 
By Email to: jao@bcr-dc.com 
Counsel for John Most 
Larry A. Nathans, Esq. 
Robert W. Biddle, Esq. 
Bennett & Nathans, LLP 
210 East Lexington Street, Suite 301 
Baltimore, MD 2 1202 
By First Class Mail 
Counsel for David Shuey 
Eugene R. Fidell, Esq. 
Matthew S. Freedus, Esq. 
Feldesman, Tucker, Leifur, Fidell & Bank 
LLP 
2001 L Street, N.W., 2nd Floor 
Washington, D.C. 20036 
By Email to: efidell@feldesmantucker.com 
By Email to: 
mfi-eedus@feldesmantuc ker.com 
Counsel for James Sinion 
-4-