Sanchez v. Sharp

Opinion

* * *

JASMINE PAUL SANCHEZ, Case No. 3:21-CV-00311-MMD-CLB

Plaintiff, ORDER TO FILE DECLARATIONS AUTHENTICATING EXHIBITS IN v. SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Defendant.

On April 19, 2023, Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 46.) However, the exhibits filed in support of the motion have not been authenticated. (See id.) A trial court can only consider admissible evidence in ruling on a motion for summary judgment. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e); Beyene v. Coleman Sec. Servs., Inc., 854 F.2d 1179, 1181 (9th Cir. 1988). Authentication is a “condition precedent to admissibility,” and this condition is satisfied by “evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what its proponent claims.” Fed. R. Evid. 901(a). The Ninth Circuit has repeatedly held that unauthenticated documents cannot be considered in a motion for summary judgment. See Orr v. Bank of America, NT & SA, 285 F.3d 764, 773 (9th Cir. 2002) (citing cases). In a motion for summary judgment, documents authenticated through personal knowledge must be “attached to an affidavit that meets the requirements of [Fed. R. Civ. P.] 56(e) and the affiant must be a person through whom the exhibits could be admitted into evidence. Canada v. Blain’s Helicopters, Inc., 831 F.2d 920, 925 (9th Cir. 1987) (citation omitted). However, a proper foundation need not be established through personal knowledge but can rest on any manner permitted by Fed. R. Evid. 901(b) or 902. See Fed. R. Evid. 901(b) (providing ten approaches to authentication); Fed. R. Evid. Accordingly, Defendants shall have until Friday, July 28, 2023 to file authenticating declarations. If declarations are not filed, the Court will deny the motion forsummary judgment. The Attorney General's Office is cautioned that further failures to 4) file authenticating documents related to exhibits filed in support of motions for summary judgment will result in the denial of those motions. DATED: July 21, 2023 .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE