Electronic Frontier Foundation v. National Security Agency et al

Filing 28

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 27 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER Stipulated Request for Continuance of Summary Judgment Briefing to Permit Reprocessing of Document and Proposed Order. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 8/11/15. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/12/2015)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

BENJAMIN C. MIZER
Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General
MELINDA HAAG
United States Attorney
ELIZABETH J. SHAPIRO
Deputy Branch Director
RODNEY PATTON
Trial Attorney
JULIA BERMAN
Trial Attorney
United States Department of Justice
Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch
20 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

10
11

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

14

21

)
ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION, )
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, OFFICE )
)
OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL
)
INTELLIGENCE,
)
)
)
)
Defendants.

22

)

15
16
17
18
19
20

Case No.: 14-cv-03010-RS
STIPULATED REQUEST FOR
CONTINUANCE OF SUMMARY
JUDGMENT BRIEFING TO PERMIT
REPROCESSING OF DOCUMENT
AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
Hon. Richard Seeborg

23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATED REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT
BRIEFING TO PERMIT REPROCESSING OF DOCUMENT AND PROPOSED ORDER
Case No.: 14-cv-03010-RS

1

Pursuant to Civil L.R. 6-2, Defendants hereby request a continuance of the upcoming

2

summary judgment briefing for Defendants to complete reprocessing of the single document

3

responsive to Plaintiff’s May 6, 2014 Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) requests that remains

4

in contention in this matter. In support of this motion, the Government states as follows:
1.

5

Throughout this litigation, the parties have worked to narrow the scope of the issues

6

in this action. After the parties agreed to a narrowing of Plaintiff’s FOIA requests, Defendants

7

produced 16 responsive documents, all of which contained redactions pursuant to claimed FOIA

8

exemptions. Defendants also withheld in full 107 documents responsive to Plaintiff’s requests.
2.

9

The parties conferred after the completion of the Defendants’ production, and

10

agreed that the only issue remaining in contention in this matter is one record withheld in full

11

pursuant to FOIA exemptions (b)(1), (b)(3), and (b)(5). See Joint Case Management Statement,

12

ECF No. 24, at 5. The parties then submitted a proposed schedule for summary judgment briefing

13

regarding that issue. See id.
3.

14

The Court adopted the parties’ proposed summary judgment briefing schedule in an

15

Order dated May 19, 2015. See Order Adopting Proposed Briefing Schedule and Vacating Case

16

Management Conference, ECF No. 25.

17

4. Under the current schedule:

18

a. On or before August 12, 2015, defendants will file their motion for summary judgment.

19

b. On or before September 11, 2015, plaintiff will file its combined cross-motion for
summary judgment and opposition to defendants’ motion.

20

c. On or before October 16, 2015, defendants will file their combined opposition to
plaintiff’s motion and reply in support of their motion.

21
22
23
24

d. On or before October 30, 2015, plaintiff will file its reply in support of its motion.
Id. at 1.

5.

Defendants have now determined that the single document that remains in

25

contention in this case may be reprocessed and released in part. Defendants have begun that

26

process and anticipate that they will be able to produce a redacted version of the document to

27

Plaintiff by September 3.

28

1
STIPULATED REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT
BRIEFING TO PERMIT REPROCESSING OF DOCUMENT AND PROPOSED ORDER
Case No.: 14-cv-03010-RS

6.

1

Plaintiff has agreed to review the reprocessed document, in conjunction with a

2

Vaughn index for that document, to determine whether it is satisfied with the disclosure or whether

3

it will challenge the redactions taken in the document. Plaintiff has agreed to inform the

4

Defendants of how it wishes to proceed by September 17, 2015.
7.

5

At that time, the parties propose to file an update with the Court, informing the

6

Court of whether any substantive matters remain in contention, and, if so, proposing a new

7

schedule for summary judgment briefing that would begin in October 2015.
8.

8
9

The requested continuance would suspend the deadlines currently on the calendar in

this matter. The parties respectfully request this relief to enable them to confer regarding the

10

reprocessed document, and to avoid potentially unnecessary briefing regarding the merits of this

11

matter.

12
13

9.

There have been no prior extensions or continuances as to the summary judgement

briefing schedule described in paragraph 4.

14

For all of these reasons, the parties respectfully request that the Court continue the current

15

summary judgment briefing schedule and order that the parties submit a status report, including, if

16

any substantive matters remain in contention, a new proposed summary judgment briefing schedule

17

by September 25, 2015.

18
19

DATED: August 11, 2015

Respectfully submitted,

20
BENJAMIN C. MIZER
Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General

21
22

MELINDA HAAG
United States Attorney

23

ELIZABETH J. SHAPIRO
Deputy Branch Director

24
25

/s/ Julia A. Berman
RODNEY PATTON
JULIA A. BERMAN, Bar No. 241415

26
27
28

United States Department of Justice
Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch
2
STIPULATED REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT
BRIEFING TO PERMIT REPROCESSING OF DOCUMENT AND PROPOSED ORDER
Case No.: 14-cv-03010-RS

2

20 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

3

Attorneys for Defendants

1

4

_/s/ Andrew Crocker__________
Andrew Crocker
Mark Rumold
Nathan Cardozo
Jennifer Lynch
ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION
815 Eddy St.
San Francisco, CA 94109

5
6
7
8
9

Attorneys for Plaintiff
Electronic Frontier Foundation

10
11
12
13
14
15

ATTESTATION PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 5-1(i)(3)
I, Julia Berman, hereby attest that I obtained the concurrence of Andrew Crocker, counsel
for the Plaintiff, Electronic Frontier Foundation, in the filing of this document.

16
17
18
19
20

_/s/ Julia A. Berman______
JULIA A. BERMAN
Trial Attorney
United States Department of Justice
Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch
20 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3
STIPULATED REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT
BRIEFING TO PERMIT REPROCESSING OF DOCUMENT AND PROPOSED ORDER
Case No.: 14-cv-03010-RS

1

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, it is hereby ORDERED that the current summary judgment

2

briefing schedule is continued, and it is further ORDERED that the parties shall submit a status

3

report, including, if any substantive matters remain in contention, a new proposed summary

4

judgment briefing schedule by September 25, 2015.

5
6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: ___________________
8/11/15

_______________________________
HON. RICHARD SEEBORG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

4
STIPULATED REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT
BRIEFING TO PERMIT REPROCESSING OF DOCUMENT AND PROPOSED ORDER
Case No.: 14-cv-03010-RS