Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_99-cv-02506/USCOURTS-cand-3_99-cv-02506-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 18:1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

1The parties brought this dispute before the Court by letter briefs dated December 12, 2005 (Docket

No. 789), and December 19, 2005 (Docket No. 798).

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LARRY BOWOTO, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

CHEVRONTEXACO CORP., et al.,

Defendants.

 /

No. C 99-02506 SI

ORDER RE: TESTING OF ORIGINAL

DOCUMENTS

Now before the Court is a discovery dispute concerning defendants’ proposed testing of original

documents.1 Defendants request that the Court order plaintiffs to produce three original documents, so that

defendants may have an expert test the documents’ authenticity. Having considered the parties’ arguments,

the Court GRANTS defendants’ request.

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that:

1) There shall be no destructive testing of any of the documents until further order of the Court;

2) Plaintiffs shall produce the original documents in their possession to defendants for testing;

3) Defendants shall videotape the entire testing process; the video need not include sound;

4) Defendants shall produce the videotape to plaintiffs immediately after testing is concluded; and

5) Defendants maymove the Court for additionaltime to produce their expert report should they need

it.

Plaintiffs request that they be told what tests will be done on the documents in advance and that their

Case 3:99-cv-02506-SI Document 807 Filed 12/21/05 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

expert and counsel be allowed to be present during the testing. These requests are DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 20, 2005

 

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:99-cv-02506-SI Document 807 Filed 12/21/05 Page 2 of 2