Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
28 Defendant-Intervenors.
1 PLAINTIFFS’ RESPONSE
2 Plaintiffs have completed their review of the April 27, 2010 document productions of third
3 parties Equality California and Campaign for Marriage Equality: A Project of the American Civil
4 Liberties Union of Northern California (collectively, the “No on 8 groups”). In accordance with this
5 Court’s April 28, 2010 Order, Doc #650, Plaintiffs file this response regarding whether the No on 8
6 groups’ production is in compliance with the Orders dated March 5, 2010, Doc #610, and March 22,
7 2010, Doc #623. Based on the representations made by counsel for the No on 8 groups and
8 Plaintiffs’ own review of the No on 8 groups’ document production, Plaintiffs inform this Court that
9 they believe that the No on 8 groups’ production is in compliance with this Court’s March 5 and
11 Respectfully submitted,
12 DATED: April 30, 2010 GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
13 Theodore B. Olson
Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr.
14 Christopher D. Dusseault
Ethan D. Dettmer
15 Matthew D. McGill
Amir C. Tayrani
16
Sarah E. Piepmeier
17 Theane Evangelis Kapur
Enrique A. Monagas
18
19 By: /s/
Theodore B. Olson
20
and
21
BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
22
David Boies
23 Steven Holtzman
Jeremy M. Goldman
24 Roseanne C. Baxter
Richard J. Bettan
25 Beko O. Richardson
Theodore H. Uno
26
Joshua I. Schiller
27
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
28 KRISTIN M. PERRY, SANDRA B. STIER,
PAUL T. KATAMI, and JEFFREY J. ZARRILLO
Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP 1
09-CV-2292 VRW PLAINTIFFS’ RESPONSE TO APRIL 28, 2010 ORDER