Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00457/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00457-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 31:3729 False Claims Act

---

STIPULATION & ORDER 

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

TIMOTHY J. HATCH, SBN 165369 

thatch@gibsondunn.com 

JAMES L. ZELENAY, JR., SBN 237339 

jzelenay@gibsondunn.com 

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 

333 South Grand Avenue 

Los Angeles, California 90071-3197 

Telephone: (213) 229-7000 

Facsimile: (213) 229-7520 

JARED M. TOFFER, SBN 223139 

jtoffer@gibsondunn.com 

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 

3161 Michelson Drive 

Irvine, California 92612-4412 

Telephone: (949) 451-3800 

Facsimile: (949) 451-4220 

CHRISTY JOSEPH, SBN 136785 CHARLES J. STEVENS, SBN 106981 

cjoseph@swlaw.com cjs@stevensandoconnell.com 

SNELL & WILMER LLP BRADLEY A. BENBROOK, SBN 177786 

600 Anton Boulevard, Suite 1400 bab@stevensandoconnell.com 

Costa Mesa, California 92626-7689 STEVENS & O’CONNELL LLP 

Telephone: (714) 427-7000 400 Capital Mall, Suite 1400 

Facsimile: (714) 427-7799 Sacramento, CA 95814-4412 

 Telephone: (916) 329-9111 

 Facsimile: (916) 329-9110 

Attorneys for Defendant, 

UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. 

MARY HENDOW and JULIE 

ALBERTSON, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX, 

Defendant. 

CASE NO. CV-03-0457 GEB DAD 

STIPULATION AND ORDER 

REGARDING PRODUCTION OF 

DOCUMENTS FROM SECURITIES CASE

Defendant University of Phoenix (“UOP”) and Relators Mary Hendow and Julie 

Albertson, hereby submit this Stipulation Regarding Production of Documents From 

Securities Case. 

28

Case No. CV 03-0457 GEB DAD 

1

Case 2:03-cv-00457-GEB-DAD Document 131 Filed 11/07/07 Page 1 of 5
STIPULATION & ORDER 

1 RECITALS 

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

WHEREAS, Defendant has received Relators First Request for Production of 

Documents dated August 24, 2007, which seeks: (1) all documents that were previously 

produced by Apollo Group, Inc. (“Apollo”) to the plaintiff in the case In re Apollo 

Securities Litigation, CV-04-2147-PHX-JAT; (2) all documents Apollo has received 

from the Department of Education (the “Department”) relating to the August 2003-2004 

program review pursuant to a subpoena or FOIA request; and (3) all documents Apollo 

produced to the Department relating to the August 2003-2004 program review; 

WHEREAS, Defendant has informed Relators’ counsel that the materials 

produced in the securities case encompass the documents requested in Relators’ second 

and third requests and, for purposes of this stipulation, the parties need only concern 

themselves with Relators’ request for documents produced in the securities litigation; 

WHEREAS, the production of documents in the securities case encompasses 

over 800,000 pages of documents, many of which Defendant believes are not relevant to 

the parties’ claims and defenses in this action, including, for example, press releases, 

analyst reports, SEC filings, budgetary materials and many emails from custodians 

outside the enrollment chain; 

WHEREAS, in the securities case Apollo waived attorney-client privilege with 

respect to communications between defendants and certain advisors relating to Apollo’s 

response to, and the disclosure and accuracy of, the February 2004 program review 

report (“Advisor Documents”); 

WHEREAS, Defendant contends that many of the Advisor Documents are 

irrelevant to this case because they relate to the issue of disclosure of the program 

review report and the defendants’ response to the Department; 

WHEREAS, while some of the Advisor Documents do mention this qui tam

litigation, Apollo only produced them to the extent they informed the defendants’ state 

of mind in the securities litigation and Apollo has never intended to waive the attorneyclient privilege or work product protections with respect to the qui tam action; 

28

Case No. CV 03-0457 GEB DAD 

2

Case 2:03-cv-00457-GEB-DAD Document 131 Filed 11/07/07 Page 2 of 5
STIPULATION & ORDER 

WHEREAS, Relators would like Defendant to produce all the documents 

produced in the securities litigation as soon as possible; 

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

WHEREAS, it is Defendant’s position that Relators are not entitled to wholesale 

production of the documents produced in the securities litigation and it would take 

Defendant a substantial amount of time to review the over 800,00 pages for relevancy 

and cull out those documents not relevant to the parties’ claims or defenses in this 

action; 

WHEREAS, on August 31, 2007, Defendant proposed, in an effort to avoid the 

expense and delay of reviewing the entire production from the securities case for 

relevancy and to expedite the production of this initial discovery, that it would produce 

all the documents from the securities litigation, regardless of relevancy, if Relators 

would agree to the following two conditions: 

1. Defendant’s production of the documents from the securities litigation 

will not be deemed an admission that any particular document is relevant 

to the claim or defense of any party; and 

2. Relators will not use the production of the documents from the securities 

case to seek an expansion of the scope of waiver of the attorney-client 

privilege and/or the work product doctrine which was made in the 

securities case, and will not argue based on the production of these 

documents that the attorney-client privilege and/or work production 

protection has been waived with respect to other communications 

concerning this action; and 

WHEREAS, on September 17, 2007, Relators indicated that they were agreeable 

to the aforementioned conditions proposed by Defendant; 

THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE AND AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 

1. Defendant has received the agreement of its parent, Apollo, to produce all 

the documents Apollo produced to the plaintiff in the case In re Apollo Securities 

Litigation, CV-04-2147-PHX-JAT upon the entry of this stipulation as an order and the 

entry of a stipulated protective order. 28

Case No. CV 03-0457 GEB DAD 

3

Case 2:03-cv-00457-GEB-DAD Document 131 Filed 11/07/07 Page 3 of 5
STIPULATION & ORDER 

2. Defendant’s production of the documents from the securities litigation 

will not be deemed an admission that any particular document is relevant to the claim or 

defense of any party. 

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

 3. Relators will not use the production of the documents from the securities 

case to seek an expansion of the scope of waiver of the attorney-client privilege and/or 

the work product doctrine which was made in the securities case, and will not argue 

based on the production of these documents that the attorney-client privilege and/or 

work production protection has been waived with respect to other communications 

concerning this action. 

DATED: October 2, 2007 Respectfully submitted, 

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER, LLP 

JARED M. TOFFER 

By:______/s/ Jared M. Toffer___________ 

 JARED M. TOFFER 

3161 Michelson Drive 

Irvine, California 92612-4412 

Telephone: (949) 451-3800 

Facsimile: (949) 451-4220 

DATED: October 2, 2007 

LIEFF, CABRASER, HEIMANN & 

BERNSTEIN, LLP 

ROBERT J. NELSON 

DANIEL E. BARENBAUM 

By:______/s/ Robert J. Nelson__________ 

 ROBERT J. NELSON 

Embarcadero Center West 

275 Battery Street, 30th Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone: (415) 956-1000 

Facsimile: (415) 956-0008 

28

Case No. CV 03-0457 GEB DAD 

4

Case 2:03-cv-00457-GEB-DAD Document 131 Filed 11/07/07 Page 4 of 5
STIPULATION & ORDER 

1 O R D E R 

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

Pursuant to the above Stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: November 7, 2007. 

Ddad1/orders.civil/USvPhoenix0457.stipord 

28

Case No. CV 03-0457 GEB DAD 

5

Case 2:03-cv-00457-GEB-DAD Document 131 Filed 11/07/07 Page 5 of 5