Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-md-01699/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-md-01699-531/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 365
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury - Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Product Liability

---

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 

-1- 

PRETRIAL ORDER NO. 23: QUALIFICATION OF DOCS GENERATED BY A PARTY 

AS AUTHENTIC OR BUSINESS RECORD – M:05-CV-01699-CRB 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

IN RE: BEXTRA AND CELEBREX 

MARKETING SALES PRACTICES AND 

PRODUCT LIABILITY LITIGATION 

CASE NO. M:05-CV-01699-CRB 

MDL No. 1699 

This Order Relates to: 

 ALL CASES. 

PRETRIAL ORDER NO. 23: 

QUALIFICATION OF DOCUMENTS 

GENERATED BY A PARTY AS 

AUTHENTIC OR BUSINESS RECORD 

1. Order Applicable to All Cases in MDL Proceedings. This Order shall 

apply to all cases currently pending in MDL No. 1699 and to all related actions that have been or 

will be originally filed in, transferred to, or removed to this Court and assigned thereto 

(collectively, “the MDL proceedings”). This Order is binding on all parties and their counsel in 

all cases currently pending or subsequently made a part of these proceedings and shall govern 

each case in the proceedings unless it explicitly states that it relates only to specific cases. 

2. Authenticity of Documents Provided or Generated By A Party. 

a. Documents Presumed Authentic. Documents produced and/or 

purportedly generated by any Party that purport to be copies of documents prepared or received 

by the Party, or by an officer, director, employee or agent of the Party, shall be presumed to be a 

faithful and authentic reproduction of the original and, subject to other applicable rules of 

evidence, admissible as such, unless any objecting Party establishes, through a motion in limine

Case 3:05-md-01699-CRB Document 1190 Filed 04/17/07 Page 1 of 5
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- 

PRETRIAL ORDER NO. 23: QUALIFICATION OF DOCS GENERATED BY A PARTY 

AS AUTHENTIC OR BUSINESS RECORD – M:05-CV-01699-CRB 

or otherwise, that the document is not authentic. All other evidentiary objections other than 

authenticity are preserved. 

b. Presumption of Authenticity Limited to Portion Generated by Party. 

For the purposes of this Order, a document in its entirety is deemed to have been generated by a 

Party only if that Party or one of its then-directors, officers, agents or employees created all of the 

document. If a Party or one of its then-directors, officers, agents or employees only created part 

of a document, such as a part of a chain of electronic mail, only that part of the document is 

deemed to have been generated by that Party. 

3. Business Records Introduced in Depositions. Documents (whether 

produced by a Party or Non-Party) introduced as an exhibit during a deposition in these 

proceedings that purport to be copies of memoranda, reports, records or data compilations in any 

form of acts, events, conditions, opinions, or diagnoses presumptively shall be considered a 

business record of that Party within the meaning of Federal Rule of Evidence 803(6) or analogous 

applicable state court rules, subject to the following paragraphs. 

4. Objections to Documents Previously Marked as Exhibits to Depositions. 

Each Party shall undertake a prompt review of all documents produced and/or purportedly 

generated by that Party that have been placed into the record as deposition exhibits in any 

deposition in those coordinated and consolidated proceedings through the date of this Order, and 

shall advise Plaintiffs’ Liaison Counsel and Defendants’ Liaison Counsel in writing within 60 

days after entry of this Order, of: (a) the deposition and exhibit number, as well as the bates 

numbers, of any exhibit where the producing or purportedly generating Party claims lack of 

authenticity and/or failure to qualify as a business record within the meaning of Rule 803(6) or 

applicable analogous state court rules; and (b) a detailed statement (including if appropriate 

reference to other pertinent documents and knowledgeable persons) of the grounds for the claim 

of lack of authenticity and/or the failure to qualify as a business record within the meaning of 

Rule 803(6) or applicable analogous state court rules. Any objection shall be deemed to have 

been made for all depositions in which the exhibit is or was used. Any such exhibits (to the 

extent such exhibit is produced and/or purportedly generated by a Party) not so identified within 

Case 3:05-md-01699-CRB Document 1190 Filed 04/17/07 Page 2 of 5
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 

-3- 

PRETRIAL ORDER NO. 23: QUALIFICATION OF DOCS GENERATED BY A PARTY 

AS AUTHENTIC OR BUSINESS RECORD – M:05-CV-01699-CRB 

that time shall be deemed faithful and authentic reproductions of the original and/or (as the case 

may be) business records within the meaning of Rule 803(6) or applicable analogous state court 

rules. 

5. Objections to Documents Marked as Exhibits in Future Depositions. 

Within 30 calendar days of the receipt of the transcript of a deposition hereafter taken in the 

coordinated and consolidated proceedings, any Party wishing to contest the presumptive 

authenticity of any document(s) previously produced and/or purportedly generated by that Party 

that were placed into the record of that deposition as deposition exhibits shall advise Plaintiffs’ 

Liaison Counsel and Defendants’ Liaison Counsel in writing of: (a) the deposition and exhibit 

number, as well as the bates numbers, of any exhibit where the producing or purportedly 

generating Party claims lack of authenticity and/or failure to qualify as a business record within 

the meaning of Rule 803(6) or applicable analogous state court rules; and (b) a detailed statement 

(including if appropriate references to other pertinent documents and knowledgeable persons) of 

the grounds for the claim of lack of authenticity and/or the failure to qualify as a business record 

within the meaning of Rule 803(6) or applicable analogous state court rules. Any objection shall 

be deemed to have been made for all depositions for which the exhibit is used in the future. Any 

such exhibits not so identified within that time shall be deemed faithful and authentic 

reproductions of the original and/or (as the case may be) business records within the meaning of 

Rule 803(6) or applicable analogous state court rules. The Parties shall make a good faith effort 

not to mark deposition exhibits en masse for the sole purpose of bringing those exhibits within the 

scope of this paragraph. 

6. Documents Provided By Non Parties. Documents produced and/or 

purportedly generated by a non-Party shall be presumed to be a faithful and authentic 

reproduction of the original, unless any objecting Party establishes, through a motion in limine or 

otherwise, that the document is not authentic and/or fails to qualify as a business record of the 

non-Party within the meaning of Rule 803(6) or applicable analogous state court rules. 

Documents produced and/or purportedly generated by a non-Party that have been or, hereafter, 

are placed into the record as deposition exhibits in any deposition in the coordinated and 

Case 3:05-md-01699-CRB Document 1190 Filed 04/17/07 Page 3 of 5
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 

-4- 

PRETRIAL ORDER NO. 23: QUALIFICATION OF DOCS GENERATED BY A PARTY 

AS AUTHENTIC OR BUSINESS RECORD – M:05-CV-01699-CRB 

consolidated proceedings shall be deemed to be faithful and authentic reproductions of the 

original and/or (as the case may be) business records within the meaning of Rule 803(6) or 

applicable analogous state court rules unless any Party raises an objection within the requisite 

time frames set forth above in paragraph 4 and 5. 

7. Remedies After Notification of any Objection to Authenticity and/or Status 

as Business Record. Upon being notified that an exhibit is claimed to be inauthentic and/or fails 

to qualify as a business record, after meeting and conferring with opposing Liaison Counsel, 

either Liaison Counsel may, with consent of opposing Liaison Counsel or with leave of Court, 

initiate appropriate discovery limited to seeking to further establish authenticity and/or the status 

of the document as a business record. 

a. Limited Scope of Deposition. Any deposition noticed solely to 

establish the authenticity or business record status of a document shall be limited strictly to that 

purpose for the specific document at issue and shall not address any other issues. 

b. Depositions of Common Pfizer Witnesses. Where such a 

deposition is taken of a common Pfizer witness, that deposition shall not count as one of the five 

common Pfizer depositions that may be taken per month pursuant to Pretrial Order No. 4, 

paragraph 25(a). However, any such deposition must be taken in accordance with the deadline 

established in Pretrial Order No. 4, paragraph 24. This order shall not be construed to amend 

Pretrial Order No. 4 in any other fashion. 

c. Depositions of Case-Specific Witnesses. Where such a deposition 

is taken of a case-specific witness pursuant to Pretrial Order No. 18, that deposition shall not 

count as one of the five case-specific depositions permitted by Pretrial Order No. 18, paragraph 

12. This order shall not be construed to amend Pretrial Order No. 18 in any other fashion. 

8. Limitations of Order. 

a. No Effect on Other Rules of Evidence. This Order addresses only 

the authenticity and/or business record status of any particular document, and is without prejudice 

to application of any other rule of evidence that may be implicated by a particular document. 

///// 

Case 3:05-md-01699-CRB Document 1190 Filed 04/17/07 Page 4 of 5
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 

-5- 

PRETRIAL ORDER NO. 23: QUALIFICATION OF DOCS GENERATED BY A PARTY 

AS AUTHENTIC OR BUSINESS RECORD – M:05-CV-01699-CRB 

b. No Waiver of Objections to Similar Documents. The failure of any 

Party to object to any document shall not constitute an admission or concession by that Party that 

similar documents to which the Party does object are authentic and/or qualify as business records 

under applicable federal or state laws. For example, the failure to object to each email being 

treated as authentic and/or a business record does not foreclose such an objection to any 

individual email. 

9. Parties to Meet and Confer on Authentication and Business Record Status. 

The Parties shall make good faith, cooperative efforts, through the meet and confer process or 

otherwise, to resolve any issues concerning the authenticity and/or business record status of 

documents subject to this Order so as to minimize the time and resources of the parties and of the 

Courts devoted to such matters. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: April 17, 2007 /s/ 

HONORABLE CHARLES R. BREYER 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 3:05-md-01699-CRB Document 1190 Filed 04/17/07 Page 5 of 5