Los Angeles Times Communications, LLC v. Department of the Army
Opinion
Opinion
Cooper, J.
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Partial Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction and Motion for Summary Judgment (docket no. 12), filed May 22, 2006, and Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment (docket no. 14), filed June 12, 2006. The Court has read and considered the moving, opposition, and reply documents submitted in connection with these motions. The matter was heard on July 24, 2006, at which time the parties were in receipt of the Court’s Tentative Order. For the reasons and in the manner set forth below, the Court hereby GRANTS Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment and DENIES Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment.
I. EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS
Plaintiff objects to various statements included in four of the five declarations submitted in support of Defendants’ Motion.
The first declaration is by Colonel Gary Pease, who currently serves as a Deputy in the Army Corps of Engineers. (Pease Deck ¶ 1.) Colonel Pease has been in the army for twenty-two years, and he served as the Director of the Reconstruction Operations Center (“ROC”) in…