'Meh': An Apparent Note-to-Self Shows Up in Published Federal Decision
Call it a cautionary tale for clerks in an age when web scrapers are watching Pacer's every move.
February 13, 2019 at 03:09 PM
2 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
Meh.
A “note to self” that was left in the initial version of a published decision issued by a San Diego federal judge is making the rounds on social media.
The decision, issued Feb. 5 by U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel—and more than likely written by one of his clerks—says, “Meh I need a better rule statement than this” immediately after a not-particularly-well-worded citation.
A member of Curiel's staff who answered the phone in his chambers Wednesday morning said the judge had no comment on the matter.
But when reached Wednesday morning, the lawyers on either side of the underlying case say that the gaffe was quickly fixed on the docket with an amended order. Indeed, the copy of the order available on Pacer on Wednesday doesn't include the parenthetical commentary, but the initial version has been preserved by docket scrapers including Justia and Recap.
Still, the decision provided a teaching moment for the legal Twitterati:
[falcon-embed src="embed_1"]
[falcon-embed src="embed_2"]
In the underlying decision, Curiel dismissed a false advertising case that the maker of the GOLO weight loss system brought against backers of a website the company claims posted bogus negative reviews of its product in order to misdirect customers. The judge, however, gave GOLO leave to amend its complaint.
GOLO LLC's lead lawyer, M. Kelly Tillery at Pepper Hamilton, said in a phone interview that he is working on an amended complaint and that he intends to file it “if the matter doesn't resolve itself.”
As to the parenthetical in the initial order, Tillery said he attributes it to the quirks of modern legal practice. “The good news for the law clerk is it could have been worse,” Tillery said. “These things happen and they happen to law clerks in good courts.”
Paul J. Safier of Ballard Spahr, who represents the defendants in the case, said in an email that the whole episode was “no big deal.”
Said Safier: “I (candidly) didn't even notice it when I reviewed the decision. I was mostly just focused on the result, which was good.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTravis Lenkner Returns to Burford Capital With an Eye on Future Growth Opportunities
Legal Speak's 'Sidebar With Saul' Part V: Strange Days of Trump Trial Culminate in Historic Verdict
1 minute readLegal Speak's 'Sidebar with Saul' Part IV: Deliberations Begin in First Trump Criminal Trial
1 minute readJosh Partington of Snell & Wilmer Is in Fact a Rock Star in the Office (and Out of It)
1 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250