Case: United States v. Virginia

3:12-cv-00059 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia

Filed Date: Jan. 26, 2012

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On February 10, 2011, the United States Department of Justice (Civil Rights Division, Special Litigation Section) released a letter of findings detailing the results of its investigation into the institutionalization of individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities in Virginia. The investigation focused specifically on the Central Virginia Training Center (CVTC), an intermediate care facility for persons with developmental disabilities (ICF/DD), but also considered the statewide institutionalization of this population (DOJ's involvement began as an investigation of CVTC pursuant to the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act but later expanded to include the statewide system's compliance with the ADA). The DOJ concluded that Virginia was systematically violating the Americans with Disabilities Act under the 1999 Supreme Court precedent, Olmstead v. LC, in forcing the unnecessary institutionalization of people with disabilities. The DOJ found a lack of sufficient community-based services available to this population, an unreasonably long waiting list for Medicaid waiver services, inadequate discharge planning at CVTC, and other deficiencies. According to the DOJ, these policies lead to a situation in which individuals with developmental disabilities were housed unnecessarily in institutions and were unable to either remain in the community or transition from an institution to a community placement.

Nearly one year later, the DOJ and Virginia entered into a settlement agreement to remedy the deficiencies outlined in the findings letter. The DOJ filed a complaint and settlement agreement in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on January 26, 2012. The court (Judge John A. Gibney, Jr.) gave preliminary approval to the agreement and allowed interested parties to submit letters and amici curiae briefs to the court in advance of the final approval of the settlement. On March 2, 2012, several individuals then living in institutions filed a motion to intervene in the litigation, claiming that they wished to remain in institutions and that the proposed settlement would force the closing of their institutions. The court found that they had adequately demonstrated that they stood to be affected by the outcome of the litigation and granted their intervention in the case on May 9, 2012. 282 F.R.D. 403. The intervenors then filed a motion to dismiss, challenging the United States' authority to bring the claim to enforce the ADA.

On June 5, 2012, the court denied the intervenors' motion to dismiss, finding that DOJ's ADA enforcement authority included the ability to investigate and file suit in federal court as had occurred here, and that the government had followed all necessary procedures.

On August 23, 2012, the court finalized its approval of the settlement between the United States and Virginia. Under the settlement, Virginia agreed to increase its community-based services for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. The goal of the agreement was to prevent individuals living in their communities from being forced into institutions, and to allow those living in institutions to transition to their communities. Virginia agreed to create additional slots on its Home and Community Based Services Medicaid waiver programs and to allow those on the waitlist to begin receiving services. The state also agreed to provide crisis services and employment training.

Reports from the independent reviewer over the next three years noted significant progress in certain areas, including the discharge of adults from institutions and development of adult crisis services. However, in other areas, progress lagged. On September 23, 2015, the DOJ submitted a motion for a court-ordered schedule of implementation. Shortly afterward, the Intervenors filed a statement of interest asking that the court suspend the closure of remaining institutions until the State could show that adequate financial and community support structures were in place.

Before the court made a determination on the DOJ's schedule motion, the parties negotiated and agreed on specific implementation schedules. The DOJ subsequently withdrew its motion in January 2016.

On August 4, 2017, the Intervenors filed a motion for injunctive relief. The Intervenors alleged that several former residents who had never voluntarily consented to a move from the State Training Centers were coerced by the State into transitioning into the community. They asked that the court permanently enjoin the State from forcibly removing residents from Training Centers and that it issue a declaratory judgment stating that the State had acted in violation of state laws.

A hearing on the motion took place on November 6, 2017. On February 2, 2018, the court (Judge Gibney) denied the Intervenors' motion. The court found that though the Intervenors had standing to pursue their motion for injunctive relief, the court did not have subject matter jurisdiction over the motion because the Intervenors' claims did not form part of the same case or controversy as the DOJ's ADA claims and, further, because Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity prevents federal courts from enjoining states based on state law claims. Even if it had jurisdiction, the court found that the Intervenors did not meet the standard for an award of injunctive relief.

The court began the process of terminating the case in 2019. After a hearing on April 23, 2019, however, Judge Gibney found that the defendants had not complied with the terms of the consent decree, and that monitoring should continue. In the interim, the independent reviewer continued to submit regular reports on compliance with the settlement agreement.

The independent reviewer’s December 2020 report observed that Virginia remained substantially in noncompliance with the consent decree. After a status conference on the consent decree, the court issued an order on March 11, 2011, finding that the Virginia had substantially complied with Sections IV and VI.D of the consent decree, and therefore relieved the Commonwealth of those portions of the consent decree. With respect to the other portions of the consent decree, the court noted the findings of noncompliance in the Independent Reviewer’s December 2020 report, as well as the parties’ acknowledgement of the need for more time to ensure compliance. Acknowledging both issues, the court extended the anticipated end date of the consent decree to July 1, 2022. The court also ordered briefing from the plaintiffs to determine the scope and need for the court’s oversight of the compliance process.

The parties continued to work towards outstanding compliance issues through the year. The court extended the anticipated end of the consent decree to December 2023 to facilitate these efforts and set forth intermittent status conferences on the consent decree discussions.

On February 17, 2023, Virginia filed a motion, requesting relief from portions of the settlement agreement which Virginia believed was in “sustained compliance.” The parties held a court-mandated settlement status conference on February 23. While a transcript of that status conference is not available on the Clearinghouse, the court discussed the request for relief with both parties in that conference. Afterwards, on March 2, 2023, Virginia also filed a motion to stay the settlement agreement. In that motion, Virginia indicated that the parties and the Independent Reviewer were still in discussion on Virginia’s motion after the status conference, and therefore asked the court to stay its ruling on that request for relief while the parties continued negotiations.

On March 8, 2023, the court denied both motions filed by Virginia without prejudice, providing that Virginia may refile its request for relief after its discussions with DOJ and the Independent Reviewer.

On July 27, 2023, after a status conference between the parties, the court issued an order to remove 35 compliance indicators (numbered in the court’s order), and the requirements for compliance in those indicators. In October, the court again extended the anticipated end of the consent decree one year, to December 2024.

As the parties and the court continued to work towards and monitor, respectively, the terms of the consent decree, a contempt hearing was held on February 20, 2024 for the continued noncompliance and delay. A transcript of that hearing is not available to the Clearinghouse.

On May 15, 2024, Virginia filed a motion for permanent injunction and termination of the consent decree. Virginia also filed a motion two days later for judicial notice of the state’s 2024-2026 biennial budget.

On June 4, 2024, the court granted the latter motion, and took judicial notice of the state’s budget as requested.

On June 13, 2024, the parties filed a new joint motion for termination of the consent decree, and entry of permanent injunction. The court responded to the joint motion on June 18 to schedule a hearing on the motion, to be held on August 22, 2024, and denied as moot Virginia’s May 2024 motion for termination of the consent decree and entry of permanent injunction. On November 21, the parties refiled their motion for permanent injunction and termination of the consent decree, to incorporate discussions that the parties had entered into to ensure compliance since the May and June filings. Under the terms of the most recently-revised motion, the permanent injunction would include the following provisions:

The August 2012 consent decree between the parties will be dissolved.
Virginia will take affirmative outlined steps towards several stated goals, based on quantitative measures that the state would attempt to meet, including the following:
- 86% of Community Services Board records meet Case Management Quality Review standards.
- 86% of children and adults receive crisis assessments at some residential, non-hospital/CSB office setting.
- 86% of individuals determined to need Therapeutic Consultation service are referred for the service, and have a provider identified within 30 days.
- 95% of individuals with identified behavioral support needs are given adequate and appropriately delivered behavioral support services.
- 86% of individuals in residential settings who have coverage for dental services will receive an annual dental exam.
- 95% of DD waiver service recipients are protected from serious injuries in service settings.
- The risk management programs of DBHDS-licensed providers of DD services are able to identify the incidence of common risks faced by people with DD that contribute to avoidable death, and take prompt action when needed.
- 95% of Direct Support Professionals receive training and competency testing;
- 95% of residential service recipients reside in a location integrated in the greater community in compliance with CMS rule.
Virginia will further work to ensure several non-quantitative goals, including the following:
- The state will implement out-of-home crisis therapeutic prevention host-home-like services for children who are connected to the REACH system and who experience a behavioral or mental health crisis, and would benefit from such service to avoid institutionalization.
- There is a 2% annual increase in the percentage of individuals on the DD waiver who receive day services, in the most integrated settings.
- The state will identify providers who have been unable to demonstrate adequate quality improvement programs, and will offer technical assistance as needed.
- The state will analyze data regarding the management needs of individuals with identified complex behavioral, health, and adaptive support needs.

The court accordingly denied as moot the previous motions for termination of the consent decree and entry of a permanent injunction, and rescheduled a status conference to discuss the parties’ revision to the joint motion.

The status conference hearing was held on January 15, 2025. The court contemporaneously approved the permanent injunction, terminating the prior consent decree and permanently enjoining Virginia per the terms of the injunction, some of which have been outlined above.

	Document
3:12-cv-00059	Docket [PACER]	March 26, 2018	March 26, 2018 Docket
	DOJ Findings Letter No Court	Feb. 10, 2011	Feb. 10, 2011 Findings Letter/Report
1 3:12-cv-00059	Complaint United States of America v. Commonwealth of Virginia	Jan. 26, 2012	Jan. 26, 2012 Complaint
2 3:12-cv-00059	Joint Motion for Entry of Settlement Agreement and Brief in Support Thereof United States of America v. Virginia	Jan. 26, 2012	Jan. 26, 2012 Pleading / Motion / Brief
2-2 3:12-cv-00059	Settlement Agreement United States of America v. Commonwealth of Virgina	Jan. 26, 2012	Jan. 26, 2012 Settlement Agreement
20 3:12-cv-00059	Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Intervention by Proposed Intervenors United States of America v. Virginia	March 2, 2012	March 2, 2012 Pleading / Motion / Brief
19 3:12-cv-00059	Motion to Intervene United States of America v. Commonwealth of Virginia	March 2, 2012	March 2, 2012 Pleading / Motion / Brief
19-1 3:12-cv-00059	Intervenor's Motion to Dismiss United States of America v. Virginia	March 2, 2012	March 2, 2012 Pleading / Motion / Brief
22 3:12-cv-00059	Order United States of America v. Commonwealth of Virginia	March 6, 2012	March 6, 2012 Order/Opinion
28 3:12-cv-00059	The United States' Opposition to Proposed Intervenor's Motion for Intervention United States of America v. Commonwealth of Virginia	March 16, 2012	March 16, 2012 Pleading / Motion / Brief

ECF Number	Description	Date	Link Date / Link
1	COMPLAINT against Commonwealth of Virginia, filed by United States of America. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(kyou, ) (Main Document 1 replaced on 6/8/2016) (sbea, ). Clerk replaced with correct document on 11/3/2017) (sbea, ). (Entered: 01/27/2012) 1 Civil Cover Sheet View on PACER	Jan. 26, 2012	Jan. 26, 2012 Clearinghouse
2	Joint MOTION for Entry of Settlement Agreement and Brief in Support by Commonwealth of Virginia, United States of America. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Settlement Agreement)(kyou, ) (Entered: 01/27/2012) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER 2 Settlement Agreement View on RECAP	Jan. 26, 2012	Jan. 26, 2012 Clearinghouse
3	Motion to appear Pro Hac Vice by Aaron Zisser and Certification of Local Counsel Robert McIntosh by United States of America. (kyou, ) (Entered: 01/27/2012)	Jan. 26, 2012	Jan. 26, 2012
4	Motion to appear Pro Hac Vice by Benjamin O. Tayloe, Jr. and Certification of Local Counsel Robert McIntosh by United States of America. (kyou, ) (Entered: 01/27/2012)	Jan. 26, 2012	Jan. 26, 2012
5	Motion to appear Pro Hac Vice by Alison Barkoff and Certification of Local Counsel Robert McIntosh by United States of America. (kyou, ) (Entered: 01/27/2012)	Jan. 26, 2012	Jan. 26, 2012
6	Summons Issued as to Commonwealth of Virginia (sent to U.S. Marshal for service) (kyou, ) (Entered: 01/27/2012)	Jan. 27, 2012	Jan. 27, 2012
7	So Ordered re 3 Motion to appear Pro Hac Vice by Aaron Zisser and Certification of Local Counsel Robert McIntosh filed by United States of America. Signed by District Judge John A. Gibney, Jr on 1/27/12. (kyou, ) (Entered: 01/30/2012)	Jan. 30, 2012	Jan. 30, 2012
8	So Ordered re 4 Motion to appear Pro Hac Vice by Benjamin O. Tayloe, Jr. and Certification of Local Counsel Robert McIntosh filed by United States of America. Signed by District Judge John A. Gibney, Jr on 1/27/12. (kyou, ) (Entered: 01/30/2012)	Jan. 30, 2012	Jan. 30, 2012
9	So Ordered re 5 Motion to appear Pro Hac Vice by Alison Barkoff and Certification of Local Counsel Robert McIntosh filed by United States of America. Signed by District Judge John A. Gibney, Jr on 1/27/12. (kyou, ) (Entered: 01/30/2012)	Jan. 30, 2012	Jan. 30, 2012
10	SUMMONS Returned Executed Commonwealth of Virginia served on 1/31/2012, answer due 2/21/2012 (Original Summons not returned by U.S. Marshal service) (kyou, ) (Entered: 02/06/2012)	Feb. 6, 2012	Feb. 6, 2012
	Set/Reset Hearings	Feb. 17, 2012	Feb. 17, 2012
	Set Hearing: Status Conference set for 2/23/2012 at 10:00 AM in Richmond Courtroom 6000 before District Judge John A. Gibney Jr. (wtuc)	Feb. 17, 2012	Feb. 17, 2012
11	MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer by Commonwealth of Virginia. (Tysinger, Allyson) (Entered: 02/21/2012)	Feb. 21, 2012	Feb. 21, 2012
12	ORDER granting 11 Motion for Extension of Time to Thursday, February 23, 2012, for the defendant to answer; a further extension may be warranted, however the Court will address that issue at the status conference scheduled for Thursday, February 23, 2012. Signed by District Judge John A. Gibney, Jr on 2/21/21. (kyou, ) (Entered: 02/22/2012)	Feb. 22, 2012	Feb. 22, 2012
13	ORDER that the defendant's filing of an answer is STAYED pending either disposition of the Joint Motion for Entry of Settlement Agreement, or upon further order of the Court. Signed by District Judge John A. Gibney, Jr on 2/23/12. (kyou, ) (Entered: 02/23/2012)	Feb. 23, 2012	Feb. 23, 2012
14	Minute Entry for proceedings held before District Judge John A. Gibney, Jr.: Status Hearing held on 2/23/2012. (Court Reporter K. Liscio, OCR.) (wtuc) (Entered: 02/23/2012)	Feb. 23, 2012	Feb. 23, 2012
15	Notice of Appearance as Counsel by Gerard Schafer as to Peggy Wood, Barbara Fallis, Tami Lassiter, Teresa Koury, Jonathon Speilberg, Marinda Lewis, Adam Bertman, Jason Kinzler, Kevin Moran, Neal Hampton, Sean Johnson, Kent Olsen, Amber Robinson. (Schafer, Gerard) Modified on 3/12/2012- was originally docketed as a motion (wtuc). (Entered: 03/02/2012)	March 2, 2012	March 2, 2012
16	Motion to appear Pro Hac Vice by Thomas B. York and Certification of Local Counsel Gerald T. Schafer Filing fee $ 75, receipt number 0422-2934953. by Adam Bertman, Barbara Fallis, Neal Hampton, Sean Johnson, Jason Kinzler, Teresa Koury, Tami Lassiter, Marinda Lewis, Kevin Moran, Kent Olsen, Amber Robinson, Jonathon Speilberg, Peggy Wood. (Schafer, Gerard) (Entered: 03/02/2012)	March 2, 2012	March 2, 2012
17	Motion to appear Pro Hac Vice by Donald B. Zaycosky and Certification of Local Counsel Gerald T. Schafer Filing fee $ 75, receipt number 0422-2934969. by Adam Bertman, Barbara Fallis, Neal Hampton, Sean Johnson, Jason Kinzler, Teresa Koury, Tami Lassiter, Marinda Lewis, Kevin Moran, Kent Olsen, Amber Robinson, Jonathon Speilberg, Peggy Wood. (Schafer, Gerard) (Entered: 03/02/2012)	March 2, 2012	March 2, 2012
18	Motion to appear Pro Hac Vice by Cordelia Elias and Certification of Local Counsel Gerald T. Schafer Filing fee $ 75, receipt number 0422-2934980. by Adam Bertman, Barbara Fallis, Neal Hampton, Sean Johnson, Jason Kinzler, Teresa Koury, Tami Lassiter, Marinda Lewis, Kevin Moran, Kent Olsen, Amber Robinson, Jonathon Speilberg, Peggy Wood. (Schafer, Gerard) (Entered: 03/02/2012)	March 2, 2012	March 2, 2012
19	MOTION to Intervene by Adam Bertman, Barbara Fallis, Neal Hampton, Sean Johnson, Jason Kinzler, Teresa Koury, Tami Lassiter, Marinda Lewis, Kevin Moran, Kent Olsen, Amber Robinson, Jonathon Speilberg, Peggy Wood. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Schafer, Gerard) (Entered: 03/02/2012) 1 Exhibit A View on PACER	March 2, 2012	March 2, 2012 Clearinghouse
20	Memorandum in Support re 19 MOTION to Intervene filed by Adam Bertman, Barbara Fallis, Neal Hampton, Sean Johnson, Jason Kinzler, Teresa Koury, Tami Lassiter, Marinda Lewis, Kevin Moran, Kent Olsen, Amber Robinson, Jonathon Speilberg, Peggy Wood. (Schafer, Gerard) (Entered: 03/02/2012)	March 2, 2012	March 2, 2012 Clearinghouse
21	TRANSCRIPT of proceedings for dates of 2/23/12, before Judge John Gibney, Court Reporter/Transcriber Krista Liscio, Telephone number 804 916-2296. NOTICE RE REDACTION OF TRANCRIPTS:The parties have thirty(30) calendar days to file with the Court a Notice of Intent to Request Redaction of this transcript. If no such Notice is filed, the transcript will be made remotely electronically available to the public without redaction after 90 calendar days. The policy is located on our website at www.vaed.uscourts.gov Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the court reporter/transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER Redaction Request due 4/4/2012. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 5/7/2012. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 6/4/2012.(liscio, krista) (Entered: 03/05/2012)	March 5, 2012	March 5, 2012
22	ORDERS the following:(1) Interested people and groups shall have until April 6, 2012, to submit written comments or amicus curiae briefs to this Court regarding the proposed agreement;(2) The Joint Motion for Entry of Settlement Agreement (the "agreement") (Dk. No. 2) is PROVISIONALLY GRANTED, subject to final approval after the submission of comments andbriefs to the Court;(3) The defendant shall make available and provide public notice of this Order by: (1)maintaining it on the website of the Virginia Department of Behavioral Health andDevelopmental Services until at least April 6, 2012; (2) transmitting it to parent groupsassociated with the Defendant's Training Centers, the Arc of Virginia, the Virginia Office for Protection and Advocacy, and the Virginia Association of Community Services Boards; and (3)transmitting it to such other interested persons as the Court identifies to the defendant. The defendant shall certify that it has provided such notice; and (4) The defendant will provide to the Court a list of all ICF/MRs and private facilities equipped to deal with profoundly disabled people within thirty (30) miles of the State Capitol. (See Order for specific details). Signed by District Judge John A. Gibney, Jr on 3-6-12. (kyou, ) (Entered: 03/06/2012)	March 6, 2012	March 6, 2012 Clearinghouse
23	NOTICE by Commonwealth of Virginia Certificate of Compliance (Tysinger, Allyson) (Entered: 03/12/2012)	March 12, 2012	March 12, 2012
24	So Ordered re 16 Motion to appear Pro Hac Vice by Thomas B. York and Certification of Local Counsel Gerald T. Schafer Filing fee $ 75, receipt number 0422-2934953. filed by Sean Johnson, Tami Lassiter, Barbara Fallis, Peggy Wood, Neal Hampton, Teresa Koury, Marinda Lewis, Kevin Moran, Amber Robinson, Adam Bertman, Jonathon Speilberg, Jason Kinzler, Kent Olsen. Signed by District Judge John A. Gibney, Jr on 3/10/12. (kyou, ) (Entered: 03/12/2012)	March 12, 2012	March 12, 2012
25	So Ordered re 18 Motion to appear Pro Hac Vice by Cordelia Elias and Certification of Local Counsel Gerald T. Schafer Filing fee $ 75, receipt number 0422-2934980. filed by Sean Johnson, Tami Lassiter, Barbara Fallis, Peggy Wood, Neal Hampton, Teresa Koury, Marinda Lewis, Kevin Moran, Amber Robinson, Adam Bertman, Jonathon Speilberg, Jason Kinzler, Kent Olsen. Signed by District Judge John A. Gibney, Jr on 3/10/12. (kyou, ) (Entered: 03/12/2012)	March 12, 2012	March 12, 2012
26	So Ordered re 17 Motion to appear Pro Hac Vice by Donald B. Zaycosky and Certification of Local Counsel Gerald T. Schafer Filing fee $ 75, receipt number 0422-2934969. filed by Sean Johnson, Tami Lassiter, Barbara Fallis, Peggy Wood, Neal Hampton, Teresa Koury, Marinda Lewis, Kevin Moran, Amber Robinson, Adam Bertman, Jonathon Speilberg, Jason Kinzler, Kent Olsen. Signed by District Judge John A. Gibney, Jr on 3/13/12. (kyou, ) (Entered: 03/14/2012)	March 14, 2012	March 14, 2012
27	RESPONSE in Opposition re 19 MOTION to Intervene filed by Commonwealth of Virginia. (Tysinger, Allyson) (Entered: 03/16/2012)	March 16, 2012	March 16, 2012 Clearinghouse
28	RESPONSE in Opposition re 19 MOTION to Intervene filed by United States of America. (McIntosh, Robert) (Entered: 03/16/2012)	March 16, 2012	March 16, 2012 Clearinghouse
29	Letters to Judge (Attachments: # 1 Letters, # 2 Letters, # 3 Letters, # 4 Letters, # 5 Letters)(wtuc) Modified on 6/11/2012 to make public(wtuc). (Entered: 03/19/2012)	March 19, 2012	March 19, 2012
30	MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages of Reply Briefs by Adam Bertman, Barbara Fallis, Neal Hampton, Sean Johnson, Jason Kinzler, Teresa Koury, Tami Lassiter, Marinda Lewis, Kevin Moran, Kent Olsen, Amber Robinson, Jonathon Speilberg, Peggy Wood. (Schafer, Gerard) (Entered: 03/19/2012)	March 19, 2012	March 19, 2012
31	REPLY to Response to Motion re 19 MOTION to Intervene filed by Adam Bertman, Barbara Fallis, Neal Hampton, Sean Johnson, Jason Kinzler, Teresa Koury, Tami Lassiter, Marinda Lewis, Kevin Moran, Kent Olsen, Amber Robinson, Jonathon Speilberg, Peggy Wood. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C)(Schafer, Gerard) (Entered: 03/19/2012) 1 Exhibit A View on PACER 2 Exhibit B View on PACER 3 Exhibit C View on PACER	March 19, 2012	March 19, 2012
32	REPLY to Response to Motion re 19 MOTION to Intervene filed by Adam Bertman, Barbara Fallis, Neal Hampton, Sean Johnson, Jason Kinzler, Teresa Koury, Tami Lassiter, Marinda Lewis, Kevin Moran, Kent Olsen, Amber Robinson, Jonathon Speilberg, Peggy Wood. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Schafer, Gerard) (Entered: 03/19/2012) 1 Exhibit A View on PACER 2 Exhibit B View on PACER	March 19, 2012	March 19, 2012
33	So Ordered re 30 MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages filed by Sean Johnson, Tami Lassiter, Barbara Fallis, Peggy Wood, Neal Hampton, Teresa Koury, Marinda Lewis, Kevin Moran, Amber Robinson, Adam Bertman, Jonathon Speilberg, Jason Kinzler, Kent Olsen. Signed by District Judge John A. Gibney, Jr on 3/20/12. (kyou, ) (Entered: 03/20/2012)	March 20, 2012	March 20, 2012
34	MOTION for Leave to File A Brief Amici Curiae In Opposition to the Motion to Intervene by ARC of Virginia. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit 7, # 8 Exhibit 8, # 9 Exhibit A)(Glasberg, Victor) (Entered: 03/20/2012) 1 Exhibit 1 View on PACER 2 Exhibit 2 View on PACER 3 Exhibit 3 View on PACER 4 Exhibit 4 View on PACER 5 Exhibit 5 View on PACER 6 Exhibit 6 View on PACER 7 Exhibit 7 View on PACER 8 Exhibit 8 View on PACER 9 Exhibit A View on PACER	March 20, 2012	March 20, 2012
35	NOTICE by ARC of Virginia re 34 MOTION for Leave to File A Brief Amici Curiae In Opposition to the Motion to Intervene Exhibit 3 to Motion for Leave to File A Brief Amici Curiae (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 3)(Glasberg, Victor) (Entered: 03/21/2012) 1 Exhibit 3 View on PACER	March 21, 2012	March 21, 2012
36	So Ordered 34 MOTION for Leave to File A Brief Amici Curiae In Opposition to the Motion to Intervene filed by the Arc of Virginia, Autism Society of Central Virginia, Autism Society Northern Virginia, Austism Society Tidewater Virginia, Peninsula Autism Society, Virginia Down Syndrome Alliance; Signed by District Judge John A. Gibney, Jr on 3/21/12 (lsal) (Entered: 03/21/2012)	March 21, 2012	March 21, 2012
37	Opposition to Motion to Intervene filed by ARC of Virginia, Autism Society Northern Virginia, Autism Society Tidewater Virginia, Autism Society of Central Virginia, Peninsula Autism Society, Virginia Down Syndrome Alliance. (Glasberg, Victor) (Entered: 03/22/2012)	March 22, 2012	March 22, 2012 Clearinghouse
38	Letters to Judge (Attachments: # 1 Letters, # 2 Letters, # 3 Letters)(wtuc) Modified on 6/11/2012 to make entry public(wtuc). (Entered: 03/27/2012) 1 Letter View on PACER 2 Letter View on PACER 3 Letter View on PACER	March 27, 2012	March 27, 2012

Case: United States v. Virginia

3:12-cv-00059 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia

Case Summary

People

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Resources

Docket

Case Details