Electronic Frontier Foundation v. United States Department of Justice

Filing 38

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Granting 37 Stipulation to Extend Deadline for Reply re 32 Cross Motion for Summary Judgment. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/28/2016)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

MARK RUMOLD (SBN 279060)
[e-mail]
NATHAN D. CARDOZO (SBN 259097)
[e-mail]
AARON MACKEY (SBN 286647)
[e-mail]
ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION
815 Eddy Street
San Francisco, CA 94109
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION

9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

12

ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION,

13
14
15
16

Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
OF JUSTICE,

17

Defendant.

18

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 16-cv-02041-HSG
SECOND STIPULATION AND ORDER
TO EXTEND DEADLINE FOR FILING
PLAINTIFF’S REPLY

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

16-CV-02041-HSG

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

1

The parties stipulate and respectfully request the Court extend the deadline for filing

2

Plaintiff’s Reply in Support of its Motion for Partial Summary Judgment until December 1, 2016.

3

Good cause exists for this request as follows:

4
5
6

1.

On November 14, 2016, the parties sought, and the Court approved, a stipulated

extension of time for the filing of Plaintiff’s Reply. See ECF No. 36.
2.

The parties sought this extension to accommodate discussions between the parties

7

concerning the scope of the FOIA request, in an ongoing effort to narrow the scope of the litigation

8

and partially resolve some of the areas in dispute without the Court’s intervention. See id.

9

3.

During the additional time, the parties have engaged in productive discussions

10

concerning the proposed narrowing and its consequences for the litigation. However, because of the

11

Thanksgiving holiday, the Department of Justice requires additional time to discuss the issue within

12

the Department and with other affected government agencies.

13
14
15

4.

Thus, and to facilitate their ongoing discussions, the parties request an additional brief

extension of three days, to December 1, 2016, for the filing of Plaintiff’s Reply.
5.

This short extension will allow the parties to complete their discussions concerning

16

the proposed narrowing. In the event the parties are unable to resolve their dispute, the new deadline

17

will still allow for two full weeks before the currently scheduled hearing date.

18

Accordingly, the parties respectfully stipulate and request that the Court extend the deadline

19

for filing Plaintiff’s Reply to December 1, 2016.

20

DATED: November 23, 2016

21

/s/ Mark Rumold
Mark Rumold
ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION
815 Eddy Street
San Francisco, CA 94109
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorney for Plaintiff
ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION

22
23
24
25
26
27

1

28
16-cv-02041-HSG

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

1

DATED: November 23, 2016
r

2

BEN
NJAMIN C. MIZER
Pri
incipal Depu Assistant Attorney G
uty
t
General
BR
RIAN STRE
ETCH
Un
nited States A
Attorney

3

EL
LIZABETH J SHAPIRO
J.
O
De
eputy Branch Director
h

4
5

10

_/s Rodney Pa
/s/
Patton______
_______
RO
ODNEY PAT
TTON
Sen Counse
nior
el
JU
ULIA A. BER
RMAN Bar N 241415
No.
Tri Attorney
ial
Un
nited States D
Department of Justice
Civ Division, Federal Pro
vil
,
ograms Bran
nch
20 Massachuse Avenue, N.W.
etts
,
Wa
ashington, D
D.C. 20001
Telephone: [phone]
02)
Facsimile: (20 616-8470
02)
0

11

Atto
orneys for D
Defendant

6
7
8
9

12

DE
ECLARATION PURSUANT TO LOCAL RU
ULE 5-1(I)(
(3)

13

Pursuant to Civil L.R. 5C
-1(i)(3), I, Mark Rumold declare th I obtained the concu
M
d,
hat
urrence of

14

Rodney Patton, coun
nsel for Def
fendant, Un
nited States Department of Justice, in the filin of this
ng

15

documen
nt.

16
17

I declare und penalty of perjury un
der
o
nder the law of the Un
ws
nited States that the fore
egoing is
true and correct. Exe
ecuted this 23rd day of November, 2
2
N
2016 in Kans City, Missouri.
sas

18
/s/ Mark Ru
umold
Mark Ru
Rumold

19
20
21
22
23

*

*

*

Upon conside
U
eration of th parties’ stipulation co
he
s
oncerning a extension of time in which to
an
file Plain
ntiff’s Reply, it is:
,
ORDERED that Plaintiff deadline to file its Re
O
t
f’s
eply is exten
nded to Dece
ember 1, 201
16.

24
25

:
r
DATED: November 28, 2016

26

__________
__________
___________
__________
__
HON. HAY
YWOOD S. G
GILLIAM, J
JR.
UNITED ST
TATES DIS
STRICT JUD
DGE

27
2

28
41-HSG
16-cv-0204

ST
TIPULATION AND [PROPO
OSED] ORDER
R