Case4:08-cv-01427-CW Document163 Filed08/28/09 Page1 of 2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10 No. C 08-1427 CW
VILMA SERRALTA,
For the Northern District of California

11 ORDER DENYING
United States District Court

Plaintiff, PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION

12 FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT
v. JUDGMENT
13
SAKHAWAT KHAN; ROOMY KHAN; and DOES
14 ONE through TEN inclusive,
15 Defendants.
/
16
17 Plaintiffs have moved for default judgment as a sanction for
18 what appears to be the fabrication of a significant piece of
19 documentary evidence by Defendants, or, at best, by their employee.
20 The Court, having considered oral argument and all of the papers
21 submitted, denies the motion for entry of default judgment.
22 However, the Court will give the jury a strongly worded instruction
23 about the inference of culpability that must be drawn from
24 fabrication of evidence, which Plaintiffs may draft. Plaintiffs
25 may move for any attorneys’ fees incurred in investigating and
26 moving for relief regarding this document. Further, the Court will
27 not allow Defendants to submit any evidence rebutting Plaintiffs’
28 evidence about the fabrication of this document, unless the Court
 Case4:08-cv-01427-CW Document163 Filed08/28/09 Page2 of 2

1 has first screened any such proposed evidence. Accordingly, on the

2 first day of trial, at 8:30 a.m., while the jury is gathering,
3 Defendants must present at an evidentiary hearing any evidence they
4 propose to offer to rebut Plaintiffs’ evidence. The Court will
5 hear it and determine whether to allow Defendants to present it to
6 the jury during trial. No such rebuttal evidence that is not
7 proffered for screening at that time will be allowed.
8 IT IS SO ORDERED.
9
10 Dated: 8/28/09
CLAUDIA WILKEN
For the Northern District of California

11 United States District Judge

United States District Court

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28