Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-02571/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-02571-10/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

---

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 * These motions were determined to be suitable for decision

without oral argument. L.R. 78-230(h).

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LESTER E. PATRICK, )

) 2:03-cv-2571-GEB-JFM-PS

Plaintiff, )

) ORDER*

v. )

)

ANTHONY J. PRINCIPI, Secretary )

of Department of Veteran Affairs, )

)

Defendant. )

)

On November 21, 2005, Defendant filed a motion for an order

that would compel Plaintiff to designate and pay for additional

transcripts for use on appeal. Plaintiff has not opposed the motion. 

The motion was set for hearing on January 9, 2006, but on

December 23, 2005, Plaintiff filed a motion to continue the hearing

until February 13, 2006. Defendant opposes Plaintiff’s continuance

motion. Plaintiff’s continuance motion is denied because he has not

provided a legitimate reason for a continuance.

BACKGROUND

On October 6, 2005 Plaintiff appealed this Court’s

August 19, 2005, Order that denied his motion for a new trial. 

(Notice of Appeal filed Oct. 6, 2005.) Plaintiff’s motion for a new

trial was based on the assertion that the jury’s verdict was “against

the clear weight of the evidence.” (See Order filed Aug. 19, 2005 at

Case 2:03-cv-02571-GEB -JFM Document 112 Filed 01/06/06 Page 1 of 3
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

1.) On November 7, 2005, Plaintiff designated and ordered transcripts

of select portions of the trial proceedings for use on appeal. (Decl.

of Joseph Maloney ¶ 5, Ex. E.) Plaintiff refused Defendant’s earlier

request that he designate “the entire transcript.” (Id.) Defendant

challenged Plaintiff’s designation of transcripts as incomplete and on

November 21, 2005, identified additional portions of the trial

proceedings he argues Plaintiff is required to designate and bear the

expense of having transcribed for use on appeal. (Maloney Decl. ¶ 6,

Ex. F; Transcript Designation Form filed Nov. 21, 2005.) Plaintiff

has not designated the trial proceedings identified by Defendant. 

Therefore, Defendant seeks to have the District Court order Plaintiff

to designate and pay for transcripts identified in Defendant’s

November 21 filing.

DISCUSSION

Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 10(b) places the burden

of designating and paying for necessary transcripts on the appellant,

in this case Plaintiff. Fed. R. App. P. 10(b); Lundy v. Union Carbide

Corp., 598 F. Supp. 451, 452 (D. Or. 1984). Federal Rule of Appellate

Procedure 10(b)(2) requires an appellant, who intends to challenge a

finding or conclusion on appeal as unsupported by the evidence, to

“include in the record a transcript of all evidence relevant to [the

challenged] finding or conclusion.” Fed. R. App. P. 10(b)(2). 

The Ninth Circuit will reverse the denial of a motion for

new trial based on the insufficiency of the evidence only “if the

record contains no evidence in support of the verdict.” Hemmings v.

Tidyman’s Inc., 285 F.3d 1174, 1189-90 (9th Cir. 2002). Therefore,

the trial proceedings identified by Defendant are relevant to the

challenged jury verdict. Accordingly, Plaintiff should have

Case 2:03-cv-02571-GEB -JFM Document 112 Filed 01/06/06 Page 2 of 3
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

designated and paid for the transcripts identified in Defendant’s

November 21 filing.

CONCLUSION

Since the trial proceedings identified by Defendant are

relevant to a review of this Court’s decision on appeal and Plaintiff

is responsible for providing the Ninth Circuit with all transcripts

relevant to the appeal, Plaintiff shall pay for the transcripts

identified in Defendant’s November 21 filing and tender payment to the

court reporter by January 17, 2006, in accordance with the Ninth

Circuit’s Order filed December 27, 2005. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 6, 2006

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

 

Case 2:03-cv-02571-GEB -JFM Document 112 Filed 01/06/06 Page 3 of 3