Case 1:10-cv-00976-CRC Document 391 Filed 08/03/15 Page 1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
TAILWIND SPORTS CORPORATION, et )
)
al.,
)
)
Defendants.
____________________________________ )
UNITED STATES ex rel. FLOYD
LANDIS,

No. 10-cv-00976 (CRC)

ECF

JOINT REPORT ON DEPOSITION SCHEDULE

The parties, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby respond to the Courts Order of
July 30, 2015. The following remaining depositions have been noticed in this case (asterisks
indicate which currently-noticed depositions may not be able to be conducted before the fact
discovery deadline):
Witness

Date

Amy Palmer

August 3, confirmed

Patty Koskie

August 4, confirmed

Sue Tabler

August 7, confirmed

Floyd Landis*

Noticed for August 10, but defendants have

advised they plan to reschedule to a later date

Bart Knaggs*

Noticed for August 11, but counsel for CSE and

relator have agreed to conduct the deposition on
August 26, 27, 28, or September 2, or 3,
depending on the convenience of the parties,
with Court permission.
1

Case 1:10-cv-00976-CRC Document 391 Filed 08/03/15 Page 2 of 5

Margot Myers

August 12, confirmed

Steve Johnson

Noticed and subpoenaed for August 12, but the

witness has not confirmed their availability

Anita Bizzotto

August 13, confirmed

Mark Fabiani

Noticed and subpoenaed for August 13, but the

witness has not confirmed their availability

Jeff Simpler*

Noticed for August 13, but may need to be

rescheduled for a later date

Joyce Carrier

August 14, confirmed

Laura Prather*

August 14, but may need to be rescheduled for a

later date

Dick Pound*

August 21, confirmed

Stacey Findley*

Noticed for August 10, but will need to be

rescheduled for a later date

David Fineman*

Noticed for August 12, but will need to be

rescheduled for a later date

Robert Lee*

Noticed for August 13, but will need to be

rescheduled for a later date

Nike, Inc.*

Noticed for August 14, but may need to be

rescheduled for a later date

Trek Bicycle Corp.*

Noticed for August 14, but may need to be

rescheduled for a later date

Giro Sport Design*

Noticed for August 14, but may need to be

rescheduled for a later date

Discovery

Noticed for August 14, but may need to be

Communications, Inc.*

rescheduled for a later date

Demand Media, Inc.*

Noticed for August 14, but may need to be

rescheduled for a later date

Livestrong Foundation*

Noticed for August 14, but may need to be

rescheduled for a later date
2

Case 1:10-cv-00976-CRC Document 391 Filed 08/03/15 Page 3 of 5

Johnny Weltz*

Noticed for August 14, but may need to be

rescheduled for a later date

Scott Mercier*

Noticed for August 14, but may need to be

rescheduled for a later date

Kevin Livingston*

September 10, 11, or 12

William Henderson*

TBD

30(b)(6) depositions of

TBD. Note that the Court has already ruled that

United States noticed by these deponents may be deposed after the United
Armstrong*

States fact witnesses and that, If necessary, the

Court will grant a brief extension of discovery to
accommodate this schedule. See ECF No. 367
at 2.

The above is exclusive of de bene esse depositions and/or depositions pursuant to the
Hague Evidence Convention for use at trial. A motion is presently before the Court for
authorization to take the deposition of defendant Johan Bruyneel pursuant to the Hague Evidence
Convention. The above list is also exclusive of any requests by plaintiffs that depositions extend
beyond seven hours.
The plaintiffs note that, although styled as a Report, the defendants filing is in
substance a motion for specific relief, which does not comply with this Courts Order of July 30,
2015, and which defendants filed without satisfying their obligation to meet and confer with
plaintiffs. L.Civ.R. 7(m). Moreover, their request is premised on several mischaracterizations of
the plaintiffs conduct during the course of discovery. Nevertheless, to aid the Court in its
consideration of the defendants requests, the government and the relator state their positions as
follows:

Case 1:10-cv-00976-CRC Document 391 Filed 08/03/15 Page 4 of 5

1. The plaintiffs anticipate completing the previously-ordered document productions on or

before August 14, 2015.1
2. The plaintiffs consent to the defendants request that the Court order the parties to meet
and confer regarding the scheduling of any remaining depositions, and that all remaining
depositions take place on or before September 15, except to the extent defendants seek to
preclude the taking of de bene esse depositions or testimony pursuant to the Hague
Convention after that date. The plaintiffs do not consent to the defendants request to the
extent that it would preclude the parties from taking depositions that have been noticed
on or before todays date. The plaintiffs note that current deadlines for expert discovery
also should be adjusted, because the remaining fact discovery may impact the opinions of
the parties experts.
3. The plaintiffs consent to the defendants request that the parties be precluded from
serving additional written discovery. The plaintiffs further request that all written
discovery served on or before July 15, 2015 be deemed timely, without regard to the
means of service.

Respectfully submitted,
BENJAMIN C. MIZER
Acting Assistant Attorney General
VINCENT H. COHEN, JR., D.C. Bar # 471489
United States Attorney

Relator has been in contact with the law firms that represented relator in the USADA proceeding (Gibson Dunn)
and the criminal proceeding (Wilson Sonsini) in an effort to obtain documents in their possession. Relator will be
able to produce responsive non-privileged documents from Wilson Sonsini prior to the August 14th date proposed
by defendant Armstrong. Relator has learned from Gibson Dunn, however, that they have over 100 boxes of
unfiltered documents relating to the USADA proceedings against Mr. Landis from back around 2007, and relator's
counsel is simply unable to store or review such a large volume of documents. Relator has produced transcripts and
other documents from the USADA proceedings, and he has proposed to defendant Armstrong that Gibson Dunn
produce the trial exhibits in its possession so as to provide Armstrong with the evidence in that proceeding, however
irrelevant it may be to this case. Defendant Armstrong has declined that proposal to date. If the parties are unable
to resolve this issue, relator will request guidance from the Court on this subject.

Case 1:10-cv-00976-CRC Document 391 Filed 08/03/15 Page 5 of 5

Darrell C. Valdez (D.C. Bar No. 420232)

U.S. ATTORNEYS OFFICE
Judiciary Center Building
555 Fourth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20530
(202) 252-2507
darrell.valdez@usdoj.gov
/s/ Robert E. Chandler
Michael D. Granston
Tracy L. Hilmer
Robert E. Chandler
David M. Finkelstein
Robert J. McAuliffe
Gregory A. Mason
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Civil Division
P.O. Box 261
Ben Franklin Station
Washington, DC 20004
(202) 514-9472 Telephone
(202) 514-0280 Facsimile
gregory.a.mason@usdoj.gov
Attorneys for the United States of America