[I suspect the cult didn't know about this because it was sent to Tom Hogan's office late the day before a holiday. I would have waited to post till next week except I bet you this ruins the holiday for a bunch of cult members. hkh]
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN, JOSE DIVISION
RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER,
H. KEITH HEN-SON,
ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT'S E: PARTE APPLICATION
[Re Docket :No. 600]
The court has issued an order to show cause re. civil contempt, setting an evidentiary hearing for September 13, 2002. Defendant has recently filed an ex parte application, seeking modification of the terms of the permanent injunction in order to allow him to submit his evidence to oppose the contempt motion. Defendant also seeks appointment of counsel and a continuance of the September 13, 2002 hearing. Having considered the papers submitted by defendant, the application is granted in part.
Defendant contends that his May 9, 2002 internet posting does not violate the permanent injunction because it constituted fair use and fair use is expressly permitted by the injunction. Plaintiff disagrees and contends that defendant's posting violated the injunction. Defendant now argues that it is impossible for him to brief certain defenses to the contempt motion without running the risk of further violating the injunction.
Defendant's application is granted in part. Defendant shall be permitted to file a brief and supporting documentary evidence under seal and without violating the injunction. Defendant should also file the brief as a public filing, however, but the public filing should be redacted to remove any quotations or paraphrases from NOTs or other works which defendant has reason to believe is considered confidential by plaintiff RTC. Mr, Henson's brief must be filed and served at least five days before the hearing.
Mr. Henson is reminded, however, that the hearing on September 13, 2002 will be an evidentiary hearing and that the Federal Rules of Evidence will apply to the parties' evidentiary submissions. Submissions that are not admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence will not be admitted into evidence.
Defendant's ex pane application also includes a request for the appointment of counsel to assist in the defense and a request for a continuance to allow counsel to become familiar with the facts and issues. Defendant's request for counsel and for a continuance are denied.
RONALD M. WHYTE United States District Judge