Doe 1 et al v. Nielsen et al

Filing 167

Order Requiring Compliance with Court Order. Further Status Report due by 2/25/2019. Signed by Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi on 2/22/2019. (vkdlc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/22/2019)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6

SAN JOSE DIVISON

7
8

JANE DOE 1, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Case No.18-cv-02349-BLF (VKD)
ORDER REQUIRING COMPLIANCE
WITH COURT ORDER

v.
KIRSTJEN NIELSEN, et al.,

Re: Dkt. No. 166

Defendants.

12
13
14

Defendants filed a status report on February 22, 2019 representing that the number of

15

documents from the Department of State remaining to be reviewed and produced total 14,396, and

16

that the number of documents from USCIS remaining to be reviewed and produced total 852.

17

Dkt. No. 166 at 2. These totals are the same as the totals that defendants represented remained in

18

their February 13, 2019 status report. Dkt. No. 162 at 2. Defendants report that they will

19

complete production of the 14,396 remaining documents from the Department of State by July 31,

20

2019, and that they will complete production of the 852 remaining documents from USCIS by

21

April 30, 2019.

22

Defendants’ status report fails to comply with the Court’s order dated February 5, 2019,

23

which required defendants to advise the Court of “their anticipated schedule for review and

24

production of the remaining documents, taking into account the number of documents that need to

25

be reviewed, the nature of the documents (e.g., emails, policy documents, etc.), the pace at which

26

the reviewers will work (i.e., number of documents per hour or per day), and whether attorneys

27

and other legal staff from the Department of Justice can assist with the initial review (as opposed

28

1

to merely ‘second-line’ review).”1 Dkt. No. 159. Defendants shall submit a further status report

2

by February 25, 2019 that includes a description of the nature of the documents remaining to be

3

reviewed, the number of reviewers currently assigned to the respective document collections from

4

USCIS and the Department of State, the number of reviewers currently assigned to the respective

5

document collections from the Department of Justice, and the estimated pace at which the

6

reviewers will work (e.g., number of documents reviewed per hour, and number of hours spent

7

reviewing per day or per week).
Defendants are advised that further failure to comply with the Court’s orders risks

8
9

sanctions.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Dated: February 22, 2019

12
13
VIRGINIA K. DEMARCHI
United States Magistrate Judge

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

The Court’s February 5 order was directed to a status report due on February 13, 2019. Dkt. No.
159. On February 13, 2019, defendants requested an extension of their deadline to provide a
proposed end-date for production until February 22, 2019. Dkt. No. 162 at 4.
2
1