The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Penn (Ds) were indicted for anticompetitive practices in violation of the Sherman Act. P sought permission to introduce a whole lot of emails from many many different parties and to prove the authenticity of their contents. P sought certification under 902(13). Ds oppose P's intent to use self-authenticating evidence, arguing that the government has not provided them with a fair opportunity to challenge the certifications because the government filed its notice to self-authenticate millions of documents 25 days before trial and the various certifications are signed by individuals who are not qualified. P argues that the contents should be deemed authenticated and admissibility can be determined on a case-by-case basis.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.