In re National Security Agency Telecommunications Records Litigation

Filing 303

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 302 . The 6/21/2007 hearing date for the United States' motion to intervene in Bready is hereby vacated and is reset for 8/30/2007 at 2:00 PM. Signed by Chief Judge Vaughn R Walker on 6/7/2007. (cgk, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/7/2007)

Download PDF
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 PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division CARL J. NICHOLS Deputy Assistant Attorney General DOUGLAS N. LETTER Terrorism Litigation Counsel JOSEPH H. HUNT Director, Federal Programs Branch ANTHONY J. COPPOLINO Special Litigation Counsel ANDREW H. TANNENBAUM ALEXANDER K. HAAS (SBN 220932) Trial Attorneys Email: tony.coppolino@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 Federal Defendants Sued in their Official Capacities and the Federal Intervenor-Defendants (United States of America, National Security Agency, President George W. Bush) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) _______________________________________) ) This Document Relates To: ) ) Bready (MDL 06-06313) ) _______________________________________) IN RE NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY TELECOMMUNICATIONS RECORDS LITIGATION No. M:06-cv-01791-VRW STIPULATION CONTINUING HEARING ON UNITED STATES' MOTION TO INTERVENE IN BREADY [Dkt. 252]; AND [PROPOSED] ORDER Judge: Hon. Vaughn R. Walker Courtroom 6 Date: June 21, 2007; 2:00 p.m. No. M:06-cv-01791-VRW -- STIPULATION CONTINUING HEARING ON UNITED STATES' MOTION TO INTERVENE IN BREADY [Dkt. 252]; AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 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 A. RECITALS On March 22, 2007, this Court granted the United States' motion to modify the schedule for the Verizon cases [Dkt. 217]. Pursuant to the terms of the Court's Order, on April 20, 2007, the United States invoked the state secrets privilege and filed a motion to dismiss and/or for summary judgment in the Verizon cases. B. With the exception of Bready, the United States obtained the stipulation of the Verizon plaintiffs to its intervention in the Verizon cases. See Dkt. 251. With regard to Bready, the plaintiffs opposed the intervention of the United States and the United States therefore sought to intervene by motion. Dkt. 252. To conserve the resources of the parties and the Court, the United States noticed that motion for the same date as the hearing date for the Verizon cases, i.e., June 21, 2007. See id. C. Following the filing of disposition motions by the United States and Verizon Defendants, the plaintiffs in the Verizon cases sought additional time to oppose those motions and the parties stipulated to modify the briefing and hearing schedule in the Verizon cases with the hearing date to be moved from June 21, 2007 to August 30, 2007. See Dkt. 287. The Court has not yet entered an order approving this stipulation. D. Pursuant to Local Rule 7.7(b), the United States seeks to modify the noticed hearing date for the motion to intervene in Bready to the same date as set forth in the stipulation concerning the Verizon cases (August 30, 2007), because the motion to intervene relates to the dispositive motions to be heard on that date. The other parties to Bready consent to this request. E. This hearing date for the United States' motion to intervene in Bready has not previously been modified and considering that motion along with the other matters pertaining to the Verizon cases would promote judicial economy. STIPULATION Pursuant to Local Rule 7.7(b), Plaintiffs in Bready, through their attorneys of record, the Government, through their attorneys of record, and the Defendants, through their attorneys of record, hereby stipulate to the following modification of the hearing date and request that the Court make this stipulation an order of the Court: No. M:06-cv-01791-VRW -- STIPULATION CONTINUING HEARING ON UNITED STATES' MOTION TO INTERVENE IN BREADY [Dkt. 252]; AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 1 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 // 1. The June 21, 2007 hearing date for the United States' motion to intervene in Bready [Dkt. 252] is hereby vacated and is reset for August 30, 2007 at 2:00 p.m. DATED: June 5, 2007 Respectfully Submitted, PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division CARL J. NICHOLS Deputy Assistant Attorney General DOUGLAS N. LETTER Terrorism Litigation Counsel JOSEPH H. HUNT Director, Federal Programs Branch ANTHONY J. COPPOLINO Special Litigation Counsel ANDREW H. TANNENBAUM ALEXANDER K. HAAS (SBN 220932) Trial Attorneys U.S. Department of Justice Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20001 Phone: (202) 514-4782 -- Fax: (202) 616-8460 Email: tony.coppolino@usdoj.gov /s/ Alexander K. Haas Alexander K. Haas Attorneys for United States of America, National Security Agency, President George W. Bush By: EDWARD GRIFFIN JOSHUA GRAEME WHITAKER Griffin Whitaker LLP 8730 Georgia Avenue Suite LL100 Silver Spring, MD 20910 /s/ Edward Griffin Edward Griffin Attorneys for Plaintiffs By: JOHN ROGOVIN SAMIR JAIN WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DOOR LLP 1875 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20006-3642 /s/ John Rogovin John Rogovin Attorneys for Defendants By: No. M:06-cv-01791-VRW -- STIPULATION CONTINUING HEARING ON UNITED STATES' MOTION TO INTERVENE IN BREADY [Dkt. 252]; AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 2 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, ALEXANDER K. HAAS, hereby declare pursuant to General Order 45, X.B, that I have obtained the concurrence in the filing of this document from each of the other signatories listed above and below. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing declaration is true and correct. Executed on June 5, 2007 of Washington, District of Columbia. PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division CARL J. NICHOLS Deputy Assistant Attorney General DOUGLAS N. LETTER Terrorism Litigation Counsel JOSEPH H. HUNT Director, Federal Programs Branch ANTHONY J. COPPOLINO Special Litigation Counsel ANDREW H. TANNENBAUM ALEXANDER K. HAAS (SBN 220932) Trial Attorneys U.S. Department of Justice Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 20 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W., Rm. 7328 Washington, DC 20001 Telephone: (202) 514-4782 -- Fax: (202) 616-8460 Email: tony.coppolino@usdoj.gov /s/ Alexander K. Haas Alexander K. Haas Attorneys for United States of America, National Security Agency, President George W. Bush By: EDWARD GRIFFIN JOSHUA GRAEME WHITAKER Griffin Whitaker LLP 8730 Georgia Avenue Suite LL100 Silver Spring, MD 20910 /s/ Edward Griffin (G.O. 45) Edward Griffin Attorneys for Plaintiffs By: : JOHN ROGOVIN SAMIR JAIN WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DOOR LLP No. M:06-cv-01791-VRW -- STIPULATION CONTINUING HEARING ON UNITED STATES' MOTION TO INTERVENE IN BREADY [Dkt. 252]; AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 3 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 1875 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20006-3642 /s/ John Rogovin (G.O. 45) John Rogovin Attorneys for Defendants By: No. M:06-cv-01791-VRW -- STIPULATION CONTINUING HEARING ON UNITED STATES' MOTION TO INTERVENE IN BREADY [Dkt. 252]; AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 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 [PROPOSED] ORDER Pursuant to the foregoing stipulation, and good cause appearing, IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 Dated: June __, 2007. ER N F D IS T IC T O R No. M:06-cv-01791-VRW -- STIPULATION CONTINUING HEARING ON UNITED STATES' MOTION TO INTERVENE IN BREADY [Dkt. 252]; AND [PROPOSED] ORDER A C LI FO Hon. Vaughn R. Walker United States District Chief Judge Walker augh Judge V nR R NIA ERED O ORD __________________________________________ IT IS S NO UNIT ED S S DISTRICT TE C TA RT U O RT H 5

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?