Vietnam Veterans of America et al v. Central Intelligence Agency et al

Filing 273

ORDER OF REFERENCE TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND EXTENDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 8/30/2011. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/30/2011)

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4
5
6
7
8

VIETNAM VETERANS OF AMERICA;
SWORDS TO PLOWSHARES: VETERANS
RIGHTS ORGANIZATION; BRUCE PRICE;
FRANKLIN D. ROCHELLE; LARRY
MEIROW; ERIC P. MUTH; DAVID C.
DUFRANE; TIM MICHAEL JOSEPHS; and
WILLIAM BLAZINSKI, individually,
on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated,

9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

No. C 09-00037 CW
ORDER OF REFERENCE
TO MAGISTRATE
JUDGE AND
EXTENDING BRIEFING
SCHEDULE

Plaintiffs,
v.
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY;
MICHAEL J. MORRELL, Acting
Director of Central Intelligence;
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE; DR. ROBERT M. GATES,
Secretary of Defense; UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY;
PETE GEREN, United States
Secretary of the Army; UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA; ERIC H.
HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General of
the United States; UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS;
and ERIC K. SHINSEKI, UNITED
STATES SECRETARY OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS,
Defendants.
________________________________/

21
22

Defendants Central Intelligence Agency and its Acting

23

Director Michael J. Morrell (collectively, CIA), and Defendants

24

Department of Defense and its Secretary Leon Panetta and

25

Department of the Army and its Secretary John McHugh

26

(collectively, DoD) move for a protective order limiting

27

discovery.

28

1

The Court will decide the CIA’s motion for a protective order

2

based on the arguments contained in sections I.A and I.B of the

3

motion.

4

Veterans of America, et al., have outstanding claims for notice

5

and health care and, if so, whether these claims should be decided

6

on an administrative record.

7

Jacqueline Scott Corley the balance of the CIA’s motion, which

8

concerns the appropriate scope of discovery of the CIA with

9

respect to claims against other Defendants, and the entirety of

These sections address whether Plaintiffs Vietnam

The Court refers to Magistrate Judge

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

the DoD’s motion.

11

place of appearance by notice from the assigned Magistrate Judge.

12

Counsel will be advised of the date, time and

Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, Plaintiffs’ response to

13

the CIA’s and the DoD’s motions shall be due August 31, 2011, and

14

the CIA and the DoD shall reply by September 9, 2011.

15

need not file separate opposition and reply briefs in light of the

16

Court’s referral order, so long as their arguments are divided

17

appropriately.

The parties

18

The Court will hear its portion of the CIA’s motion on

19

September 29, 2011 at 2:00 p.m., unless the matter is decided on

20

the papers.

21

IT IS SO ORDERED.

22
23
24

Dated: 8/30/2011

CLAUDIA WILKEN
United States District Judge

25
26
27
28
cc: JCS

2