Currently I’m not at liberty to go into great detail on what is happening with the return of the DVDs constituting 99+% of the information we obtained in discovery. That will soon be fought in court and I can probably talk more about it then. What I can say is that PNNL claimed the information on those DVDs was “extremely sensitive” information and hence my lawyer and I were required to return it. The judge agreed without giving us an opportunity to refute that claim. This is acceptable in certain extraordinary circumstances which PNNL/Battelle claimed were present.
I thought people would be interested in knowing what PNNL defines as “sensitive”. This is from their public website (IIRC PNWD stands for Pacific NorthWest Division):
At PNWD, information is considered sensitive if any of the following criteria are met:
- information is protected under the Privacy Act
- information for which Battelle would be liable if released to unauthorized individuals
- information for which Battelle is legally responsible
- information of which corruption or loss would substantially delay a project or impact the completion of a mission or goal
- information that cannot be reproduced or that would be unreasonably expensive to reproduce
- information that could profit an employee or outsider through unauthorized use, modification, or disclosure;
- or information that could be harmful to DOE, Battelle, or cause unfavorable publicity (e.g., financial, technical, or supply data) data identified by DOE as unclassified controlled nuclear information (UCNI) or data identified as export controlled information.
Bold emphasis added by me.
Needless to say we are challenging the validity of this as being sufficient reason to withhold discovery data. These guys are slime-balls and know that public disclosure is not good for their future.
I can understand their motives. Being rented out to their fellow inmate bidding the most cigarettes is something to be postponed as long as possible.