Jewel et al v. National Security Agency et al

Filing 43

STIPULATION to Extend Time to Respond to Supplemental Brief (Dkt. 38-1) and Proposed Order by Keith B. Alexander, Dennis C Blair, Department of Justice, Eric Holder, National Security Agency, Barack Obama, United States of America. (Coppolino, Anthony) (Filed on 9/1/2009)

Download PDF
Jewel et al v. National Security Agency et al Doc. 43 Case3:08-cv-04373-VRW Document43 Filed09/01/09 Page1 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MICHAEL F. HERTZ Deputy Assistant Attorney General JOSEPH H. HUNT Director, Federal Programs Branch VINCENT M. GARVEY Deputy Branch Director ANTHONY J. COPPOLINO Special Litigation Counsel tony.coppolino@usdoj.gov MARCIA BERMAN Trial Attorney Marcia.Berman@usdoj.gov U.S. Department of Justice Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Rm. 6102 Washington, D.C. 20001 Phone: (202) 514-4782 Fax: (202) 616-8460 Attorneys for the Government Defendants Sued in their Official Capacity UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION ) ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, et al., ) ) Defendants. _______________________________________) CAROLYN JEWEL, et al. No. 08-cv-4373-VRW STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF (Dkt. 38-1) Courtroom: 6, 17th Floor Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6.2, the parties hereby stipulate to a one day extension of time for the Government Defendants to respond to Plaintiffs' Supplemental brief (Dkt. 38-1). RECITALS 1. On August 4, 2009, the Court granted the plaintiffs leave to file a supplemental brief in this action and also granted the Government Defendants until September 3, 2009, to file a response of equal length. See Dkt. 40. 2. The Government Defendants request (and the plaintiffs do not oppose) a one-day extension to submit its response to September 4, 2009. The undersigned counsel for the No. 08-cv-4373-VRW Stipulation to Extend Time to Respond to Supplemental Brief (Dkt. 38-1) 1 Dockets.Justia.com Case3:08-cv-04373-VRW Document43 Filed09/01/09 Page2 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Government Defendants requests an additional day to complete this submission due to the press of other prior business, including the submission of a dispositive motion to the Court on August 21, 2009, in the Al-Haramain action (07-cv-00109-VRW), and the submission of a case management report on August 27, 2009 in the Shubert action (07-cv-00693-VRW). The Government has not previously requested an extension of the instant deadline, and the requested extension will not alter the date of any event or any deadline already fixed by Court order. See LCvR 6.2(a). STIPULATION Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 6.2, the parties hereby stipulate that the response of the Government Defendants to plaintiffs' supplemental brief (Dkt. 38-1) shall be due no later than September 4, 2009. Date: September 1, 2009 Respectfully Submitted, MICHAEL F. HERTZ Deputy Assistant Attorney General JOSEPH H. HUNT Director, Federal Programs Branch VINCENT M. GARVEY Deputy Branch Director ANTHONY J. COPPOLINO Special Litigation Counsel tony.coppolino@usdoj.gov MARCIA BERMAN Trial Attorney Marcia.Berman@usdoj.gov U.S. Department of Justice Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Rm. 6102 Washington, D.C. 20001 Phone: (202) 514-4782 Fax: (202) 616-8460 By: /s Anthony J. Coppolino Anthony J. Coppolino Attorneys for the Government Defendants Sued in Their Official Capacity No. 08-cv-4373-VRW Stipulation to Extend Time to Respond to Supplemental Brief (Dkt. 38-1) 2 Case3:08-cv-04373-VRW Document43 Filed09/01/09 Page3 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DECLARATION PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 45, X.B I, ANTHONY J. COPPOLINO, hereby declare pursuant to General Order 45, X.B, that I have obtained the concurrence in the filing of this document from the other signatory listed below. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing declaration is true and correct. Executed on September 1, 2009, in the City of Washington, District of Columbia. Respectfully Submitted, MICHAEL F. HERTZ Deputy Assistant Attorney General JOSEPH H. HUNT Director, Federal Programs Branch VINCENT M. GARVEY Deputy Branch Director ANTHONY J. COPPOLINO Special Litigation Counsel MARCIA BERMAN Trial Attorney U.S. Department of Justice Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Rm. 6102 Washington, D.C. 20001 Phone: (202) 514-4782 Fax: (202) 616-8460 By: /s Anthony J. Coppolino Anthony J. Coppolino Attorneys for the Government Defendants Sued in their Official Capacity ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION CINDY COHN (145997) KEVIN S. BANKSTON (217026) 454 Shotwell Street San Francisco, CA 94110 Telephone: 415/436-9333 415/436-9993 (fax) By: s/ Cindy Cohn per G.O. 45 Cindy Cohn Attorneys for Plaintiffs No. 08-cv-4373-VRW Stipulation to Extend Time to Respond to Supplemental Brief (Dkt. 38-1) 3 Case3:08-cv-04373-VRW Document43 Filed09/01/09 Page4 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 No. 08-cv-4373-VRW Stipulation to Extend Time to Respond to Supplemental Brief (Dkt. 38-1) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) _______________________________________) CAROLYN JEWEL, et al. No. 08-cv-4373-VRW [PROPOSED] ORDER Courtroom: 6, 17th Floor Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker [PROPOSED] ORDER Pursuant to the parties' stipulation, and good cause appearing, it is hereby ORDERED that: The due date for Government Defendants' response to plaintiffs' supplemental brief (Dkt. 38-1) in this action is hereby extended to September 4, 2009. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: __________, 2009. __________________________________________ Hon. Vaughn R. Walker United States District Chief Judge

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?