Freedom of the Press Foundation v. United States Department of Justice

Northern District of California, cand-4:2015-cv-03503

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Granting {{41}} Stipulation Extend by Fourteen Days Defendant's Deadline to File its Reply in Support of its Motion for Summary Judgment and Opposition to Plaintiff's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment.

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

1 BENJAMIN C. MIZER Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General 2 MARCIA BERMAN 3 Assistant Branch Director ANDREW M. BERNIE, D.C. Bar No. 995376 4 Trial Attorney United States Department of Justice 5 Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW 6 Washington, D.C. 20530 7 Telephone: (202) 616-8488 Facsimile: (202) 616-8470 8 Email: andrew.m.bernie@usdoj.gov 9 Attorneys for Defendant 10 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 14 FREEDOM OF THE PRESS FOUNDATION,) Civil Action No. 3:15-cv-03503-HSG) 15) STIPULATION AND ORDER TO Plaintiff,) EXTEND BY FOURTEEN 16) DAYS DEFENDANT'S DEADLINE TO v.) FILE ITS REPLY IN SUPPORT OF ITS 17) SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF) ITS OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S 18 JUSTICE,) CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY) JUDGMENT 19 Defendant.)) 20 Pursuant to Rule 6(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Civil Rule 6-2, 21 22 Defendant requests and the parties, by and through undersigned counsel, have conferred and 23 hereby stipulate to and respectfully request that (1) the Court extend the deadline by fourteen days 24 to July 15 for Defendant to file its combined opposition to Plaintiff's cross-motion for summary 25 judgment and its reply in support of its motion for summary judgment; and (2) the Court 26 correspondingly extend by fourteen days to August 8 the deadline for Plaintiff's reply in support of 27 -1- 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND BY FOURTEEN DAYS DEFENDANT'S DEADLINE TO FILE ITS REPLY IN SUPPORT OF ITS SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ITS OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, CASE NO. 3:15-CV-3503-HSG 1 its cross-motion for summary judgment. The parties are not requesting that the Court reschedule 2 the August 18, 2016 hearing date on those motions and stipulate that, subject to the Court's 3 approval, the hearing can proceed as scheduled on that date. 4 Defendant provides the following bases in support of its request: 5 1. On January 21, 2016, the parties submitted a stipulated request to, inter alia, set a 6 7 summary judgment briefing schedule. See ECF No. 25. Thereafter, the Court adopted the parties' 8 proposed schedule and set the following dates for briefing: 9 a. May 9, 2016 for Defendant's motion for summary judgment. 10 b. June 10, 2016 for Plaintiff's opposition to Defendant's motion, and any cross- 11 motion for summary judgment by Plaintiff. 12 c. July 1, 2016 for Defendant's reply in support of Defendant's motion for 13 summary judgment and opposition to Plaintiff's cross-motion. 14 15 d. July 25, 2016 for Plaintiff's reply in support of Plaintiff's cross-motion. 16 2. Pursuant to this briefing schedule, Defendant filed its summary judgment motion on 17 May 9, 2016, and Plaintiff filed its cross-motion for summary judgment and opposition to 18 Defendant's motion on June 10, 2016. See ECF Nos. 30, 37. On that same date, non-parties the 19 Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and thirty-seven additional media organizations 20 filed a motion to file an amicus brief in support of Plaintiff's opposition to Defendant's motion for 21 22 summary judgment (and a proposed amicus brief). See ECF No. 36. 23 3. Defendant needs a fourteen-day extension of its current deadline from July 1 to July 24 15 to complete its combined opposition to Plaintiff's motion and reply in support of its motion. 25 Consistent with the parties' stipulation to exceed page limits (and this Court's order granting that 26 stipulation), Plaintiff's June 10 memorandum is 35 pages, and it challenges both the adequacy of 27 -2- 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND BY FOURTEEN DAYS DEFENDANT'S DEADLINE TO FILE ITS REPLY IN SUPPORT OF ITS SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ITS OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, CASE NO. 3:15-CV-3503-HSG 1 the FBI's search and Vaughn showing, as well as a large number of specific withholdings. 2 Although undersigned counsel has been working diligently on this case, given the number of issues 3 raised by Plaintiff's filing and the proposed amicus brief as well as the press of other matters, 4 undersigned counsel requires additional time to coordinate with his client and complete 5 Defendant's combined reply in support of its summary judgment motion and opposition to 6 7 Plaintiff's cross-motion. 8 4. Defendant also seeks a concomitant fourteen-day extension for Plaintiff's current 9 deadline for its reply in support of its motion for summary judgment from July 25 to August 8. 10 5. Both parties request that the hearing date for these motions remain on August 18, 11 2016. However, both parties also state that they have no objection to rescheduling the hearing date 12 should the Court believe doing so is necessary in light of this stipulation. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 -3- 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND BY FOURTEEN DAYS DEFENDANT'S DEADLINE TO FILE ITS REPLY IN SUPPORT OF ITS SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ITS OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, CASE NO. 3:15-CV-3503-HSG 1 DATED: June 24, 2016 Respectfully submitted, 2 BENJAMIN C. MIZER 3 Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General 4 MARCIA BERMAN Assistant Director, Federal Programs Branch 5 /s/ 6 ANDREW M. BERNIE (D.C. Bar #995376) Trial Attorney 7 U.S. Department of Justice Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 8 20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20530 9 Telephone: (202) 616-8488 Facsimile: (202) 616-8470 10 E-mail: andrew.m.bernie@usdoj.gov 11 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 LOCAL RULE 5-1(i) ATTESTATION 21 I attest that I have obtained Marcia Hofmann's concurrence in the filing of this document. 22 23 /s/ Andrew Bernie 24 25 26 27 -4- 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND BY FOURTEEN DAYS DEFENDANT'S DEADLINE TO FILE ITS REPLY IN SUPPORT OF ITS SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ITS OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, CASE NO. 3:15-CV-3503-HSG 1 BENJAMIN C. MIZER 2 Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General MARCIA BERMAN 3 Assistant Branch Director 4 ANDREW M. BERNIE, D.C. Bar No. 995376 Trial Attorney 5 United States Department of Justice Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch 6 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW Washington, D.C. 20530 7 Telephone: (202) 616-8488 8 Facsimile: (202) 616-8470 Email: andrew.m.bernie@usdoj.gov 9 Attorneys for Defendant 10 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 14 FREEDOM OF THE PRESS FOUNDATION,) Civil Action No. 3:15-cv-03503-HSG 15) Plaintiff,) DECLARATION OF ANDREW BERNIE 16) v.) 17)) 18 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF) JUSTICE,) 19) Defendant.) 20) 21 I, Andrew Bernie, do hereby declare as follows: 22 1. I am an attorney with the Civil Division of the United States Department of Justice. 23 I have been assigned primary responsibility for representing Defendant in this matter. 24 2. Defendant's reply in support of Defendant's motion for summary judgment and 25 26 opposition to Plaintiff's cross-motion is currently due July 1, 2016. 27 3. Defendant needs a fourteen-day extension of its current deadline from July 1 to July -5- 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND BY FOURTEEN DAYS DEFENDANT'S DEADLINE TO FILE ITS REPLY IN SUPPORT OF ITS SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ITS OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, CASE NO. 3:15-CV-3503-HSG 1 15 to complete its combined opposition to Plaintiff's motion and reply in support of its motion. 2 Although undersigned counsel has been working diligently on this case, given the volume of issues 3 raised by Plaintiff's filing and the proposed amicus brief as well as the press of other matters, 4 undersigned counsel requires additional time to coordinate with his client and complete 5 Defendant's combined reply in support of its summary judgment motion and opposition to 6 7 Plaintiff's cross-motion. 8 4. This is the first modification of time sought in this case by either party. 9 5. Defendant also seeks a concomitant fourteen-day extension for Plaintiff's current 10 deadline for its reply in support of its motion for summary judgment from July 25 to August 8. 11 6. Counsel for Plaintiff has stated that Plaintiff consents to both requests. Both parties 12 also have agreed and request that the hearing date for these motions remain on August 18, 2016. 13 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 14 15 Dated: June 24, 2016 s/Andrew Bernie ANDREW BERNIE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 -6- 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND BY FOURTEEN DAYS DEFENDANT'S DEADLINE TO FILE ITS REPLY IN SUPPORT OF ITS SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ITS OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, CASE NO. 3:15-CV-3503-HSG 1 ORDE ER 2 PUR RSUANT TO O STIPULA ATION, it is hereby ORD DERED thatt 3 4 1. The currrent deadlinee of July 1 fo or Defendannt to file its ccombined oppposition to P Plaintiff's 5 crosss-motion fo or summary judgment j an nd reply in suupport of its motion is heereby extendded by 6 fourrteen days an nd is now du ue on July 15 5, 2016. 7 2. The currrent deadlinee of July 25 for Plaintifff to file its reeply in suppoort of its mottion for 8 sum mmary judgm ment is hereb by extended by fourteen days to Auggust 8, 2016.. 9 3. The currrent hearing date for thesse motions rremains as cuurrently scheeduled on A August 18, 10 11 2016. 12 13 AND IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 15 DATED: June 27, 2 2016 ______ _______________________________________ HON. HAYWOOD D S. GILLIAAM JR. 16 Unitedd States Disttrict Judge 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 -7-- 28 STIPULA ATION ANDD [PROPOSED D] ORDER T TO EXTENDD BY FOURTEEEN DAYS DEFENDANT D T'S DEADLIN NE TO FILE E ITS REPLY IN SUPPORTT OF ITS SUM MMARY JUDG GMENT MOTTION AND IT TS OPPOSITIO ON TO PLAINNTIFF'S CRO OSS-MOTION FOR SUMMAARY JUDGME ENT, CASE NO O. 3:15-CV-35503-HSG