Case: Jewel v. National Security Agency

4:08-cv-04373 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Filed Date: Sept. 18, 2008

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On September 18, 2008, AT&T customers filed this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against the United States. The plaintiffs, represented by the Electronic Frontier Foundation and private counsel, claimed that the federal government's electronic surveillance program violated the Fourth Amendment, First Amendment, separation of powers, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the Wiretap Act, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act or the …

On September 18, 2008, AT&T customers filed this class action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against the United States. The plaintiffs, represented by the Electronic Frontier Foundation and private counsel, claimed that the federal government's electronic surveillance program violated the Fourth Amendment, First Amendment, separation of powers, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the Wiretap Act, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act or the Stored Communications Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act.

Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged the National Security Agency ("NSA") implemented a massive, indiscriminate, illegal dragnet of the phone calls and emails of tens of millions of ordinary Americans since the September 11 terrorist attacks. The core component of the defendants' surveillance program was a nationwide network of sophisticated communication surveillance devices attached to the key facilities of various telecommunication companies that carried Americans' Internet and telephone communications.

On October 28, 2008, Judge Walker marked this case as formally related to Hepting v. AT&T (NS-CA-0004, in this Clearinghouse). The Multi District Litigation (MDL) Panel then consolidated the case as part of a multi-district litigation consolidation, In Re National Security Agency Telecommunications Records Litigation (NS-CA-11, in this Clearinghouse). For information about what happened while this case was a part of that multi-district consolidated matter, see NS-CA-0004.

After dismissals of almost all of the cases in the MDL, this case was one of only two cases remaining. The other case was Shubert v. Obama, see NS-CA-0006, in this Clearinghouse. But in January 21, 2010, Judge Walker dismissed both this case and Shubert v. Obama, because the plaintiffs failed to establish their standing to bring suit—that is, they failed to establish that they were personally affected by the alleged violation of law. Jewel v. NSA, 2010 WL 235075 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 21, 2010). The plaintiffs appealed.

On December 29, 2011, the Ninth Circuit vacated Judge Walker's dismissal decision. Writing for the Ninth Circuit, Judge McKeown held that the plaintiffs did have standing, and remanded "with instructions to consider, among other claims and defenses, whether the government's assertion that the state secrets privilege bars this litigation." Jewel v. NSA, 673 F.3d 902 (9th Cir. 2011).

In 2012, Judge Walker retired; the matter was reassigned to District Judge Jeffrey S. White on May 18, 2012. Upon remand, the plaintiffs filed a motion for partial summary judgment requesting that the district court dismiss the defendants' state secret defense. The U.S. cross-moved to dismiss on the basis of sovereign immunity for the statutory claims and for summary judgment on the assertion of the state secrets privilege.

On July 23, 2013, Judge White granted plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment, rejecting the government's state secrets defense. However, Judge White also granted the government's motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' claims for damages under FISA and all statutory claims for injunctive relief on the basis of sovereign immunity. Judge White reserved ruling on the government's motions for summary judgment on remaining non-statutory claims (counts 1-4 of the Jewel Complaint and the fourth cause of action in the Shubert Complaint). Jewel v. NSA, 965 F. Supp. 2d 1090 (N.D. Cal. 2013).

On July 24, 2013, Judge White granted a motion to relate this case with First Unitarian Church of Los Angeles v. NSA (NS-CA-0003 in this Clearinghouse).

Under the "minimization" rules applicable to the Section 215 metadata program, the NSA had been required to destroy all metadata within five years of collection. See, e.g., In re Application of the FBI for an Order Requiring the Production of Tangible Things From [Redacted], BR 14-01, NS-DC-0051. In this case, the plaintiffs argued that this data destruction would interfere with their ability to establish the facts needed for their lawsuit. Accordingly, on their request, Judge White entered a temporary restraining order on March 10, 2014, requiring the preservation of relevant evidence pending the parties' further briefing and the Court's final determination of the preservation issues. In its restraining order, the Court required that the government refrain from "destroying any potential evidence relevant to the claims at issue in this action, including but not limited to prohibiting the destruction of any telephone metadata or 'call detail' records, pending further order of the Court." This order applied to this case; Shubert v. Obama; and First Unitarian Church of Los Angeles v. NSA.

This temporary restraining order directly conflicted with the standing Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court order in In re Application of the FBI for an Order Requiring the Production of Tangible Things From [Redacted], BR 14-01 (NS-DC-0051 in this Clearinghouse). To eliminate the conflict, the FISC responded to Judge White's order by granting temporary relief from the five-year destruction requirement but required that telephony metadata being preserved beyond the five-year limitation not be used by the NSA for any purpose.

In the summer of 2014, the plaintiffs moved for partial summary judgment on their Fourth Amendment claim, and the defendants responded by also moving for partial summary judgment on the Fourth Amendment claim.

On February 10, 2015, Judge White denied the plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment and granted the defendants' motion for partial summary judgment. Judge White held that the plaintiffs failed to establish a sufficient factual basis to find that they had standing to sue under the Fourth Amendment regarding the possible interception of their Internet communications. Further, even if the plaintiffs could establish standing, they argued that the claim must be dismissed because any possible defenses would require impermissible disclosure of state secret information. Jewel v. NSA, 2015 WL 545925 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 10, 2015). On May 20, 2015, the Court held that its adjudication of this claim was a final determination and no just reason existed for delay in entering final judgment on this claim. The court entered partial judgment and dismissed the claim that the government defendants violated the Fourth Amendment rights of the plaintiffs by copying and searching the contents of the plaintiff’s internet communications.

On June 4, 2015, the plaintiffs appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. On December 18, 2015, the Ninth Circuit dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the appeal did not meet the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) certification, and remanded to the district court for further proceedings. The panel concluded that that the certification was not warranted because the question of whether the copying and searching of plaintiff’s Internet communications violated the Fourth Amendment, was intertwined with several other issues that remained pending in district court, and the interlocutory appeal would only have prolonged final resolution of the case. Each party was to bear its own costs on appeal. Jewel v. NSA, 810 F.3d 622.

On February 19, 2016, Judge White found that in the absence of sovereign immunity, the plaintiffs could state claims under the Wiretap Act and the Stored Communications Act. The District Court thus granted plaintiffs’ motion to lift the stay of discovery on Counts 9, 12, and 15, and that any disputed materials that defendants contended that would potentially run the risk of impermissible disclosure of state secret information could be disclosed ex parte for in camera review. On December 16, 2016, the parties filed a joint discovery letter outlining their respective positions on disputed discovery issues.

On April 26, 2017, the FISC issued an order approving changes to the Section 702 Upstream program, including revised minimization procedures which required the NSA to destroy, as quickly as practicable, all raw Upstream Internet communications data acquired on or before March 17, 2017, that existed in all of NSA’s institutionally managed repositories.

At the May 19, 2017 case management conference, Judge White ordered the government defendants to marshal all of their evidence relating to plaintiffs’ standing and to present that evidence to the court, making as much of it public as possible. The defendants’ production of materials was completed on April 1, 2018. On May 7, 2018, plaintiffs filed a motion to obtain access to the classified materials, which was opposed by the government defendants, and subsequently denied by the court on June 13, 2018.

On August 17, 2018, Judge White ordered the parties to file dispositive motions to resolve the threshold legal issues raised by the remaining statutory claims in this matter. On August 24, 2018, the parties submitted a joint discovery letter, and the plaintiffs argued that the court should order the government defendants to respond separately and individually to each request for admission.

On September 7, 2018, the government defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. They argued because of the state secrets privilege and of the statutory privileges established by 50 U.S.C. § 3024(i)(1) and 50 U.S.C. § 3605(a), plaintiffs lacked admissible evidence to establish their standing to maintain their statutory claims. Consequently, the Court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to consider them. Moreover, they argued that dismissal was required because the case could not be litigated on the merits without creating an unjustifiable risk of divulging state secrets. On September 28, 2018, the plaintiffs responded, arguing that (1) the government defendant could not meet its summary judgment burden; (2) the public evidence demonstrated plaintiffs’ standing; (3) the undisclosed classified evidence also demonstrated plaintiffs’ standing; (4) section 2712(b)(4) required the use of classified evidence to decide standing; and (5) this lawsuit may not be dismissed on state secrets grounds.

After the plaintiffs and defendants exchanged responses and replies on the above-mentioned points of contention for several months, the court held oral arguments for the summary judgement motions. On April 25, 2019, the court entered a judgement denying the plaintiffs' summary judgement cross-motion and ordered summary judgement for the defendants. The court found that the plaintiffs could not produce admissible evidence to show that the plaintiffs were harmed through surveillance. This was due to a lack of admissible evidence that the customers in question were among those affected by the defendants. Additionally, the classified information the court viewed could not be shared as it would constitute a grave danger to national security. The court found that it could not issue a judgement on whether or not there was redressability for the injury suffered by the plaintiffs without also endangering national security.

The plaintiffs appealed to the Ninth Circuit on April 25, 2019. Their appeal included the February 10, 2015 order granting defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment, the June 13, 2018 order denying plaintiffs’ motion for access to classified discovery materials, the August 28, 2018 order regarding parties’ joint discovery letter brief, the April 25, 2019 order granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment and denying plaintiffs’ cross-motion to proceed to the merits, and the court’s April 25, 2019 Classified Order.

On November 2, 2020 a panel of the Ninth Circuit consisting of Circuit Judges Ronald Gould, Margaret McKeown, and Carlos Bea heard argument from the parties. After oral argument, on December 24, 2020, the government filed a letter with the court notifying it that the government had sought certiorari from the Supreme Court in Fazaga v. Federal Bureau of Investigation, another case about the intersection of FISA and the state secrets privilege (NS-CA-0030 in this Clearinghouse). The court ordered the plaintiffs to file a response addressing the question of whether this case ought to be held until the Fazaga case was resolved because of the similar issues they presented on January 27, 2021. On February 4, 2021, the plaintiffs responded, and since then there has been no action in this case.

This appeal is ongoing as of February 2021.

Summary Authors

Michael Mirdamadi (11/19/2013)

Jessica Kincaid (2/17/2015)

Dawn Lui (12/2/2018)

Carter Powers Beggs (10/24/2019)

Dan Toubman (2/23/2020)

Jonah Hudson-Erdman (2/21/2021)

Related Cases

Center for Constitutional Rights v. Obama, Northern District of California (2006)

Hepting v. AT&T, Northern District of California (2006)

Shubert v. Obama, Northern District of California (2006)

In re National Security Agency Telecommunications Records Litigation, Northern District of California (2006)

First Unitarian Church of Los Angeles v. National Security Agency, Northern District of California (2013)

In re Application of the FBI for an Order Requiring the Production of Tangible Things From [Redacted], BR 14-01, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (2014)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attrorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4175713/parties/jewel-v-national-security-agency/


Judge(s)

McKeown, M. Margaret (California)

Walker, Vaughn R. (California)

White, Jeffrey Steven (California)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Antaramian, Aram Vazken (California)

Bankston, Kevin Stuart (District of Columbia)

Berkowitz, Benjamin (California)

Blizzard, Paula Lenore (California)

Cohn, Cindy A. (California)

Crocker, Andrew (California)

Greene, David Allen (California)

Judge(s)

McKeown, M. Margaret (California)

Walker, Vaughn R. (California)

White, Jeffrey Steven (California)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Antaramian, Aram Vazken (California)

Bankston, Kevin Stuart (District of Columbia)

Berkowitz, Benjamin (California)

Blizzard, Paula Lenore (California)

Cohn, Cindy A. (California)

Crocker, Andrew (California)

Greene, David Allen (California)

Kwun, Michael S. (California)

Maazel, Ilann M. (New York)

Mackey, Aaron David (California)

Meny, Rachael Elizabeth (California)

Moore, Thomas Edward III (California)

Opsahl, Kurt Bradford (California)

Rumold, Mark Thomas (California)

Sessions, Justina Kahn (California)

Tassin, Phillip James (California)

Tien, Lee (California)

Tyre, James Samuel (California)

Walton−Hadlock, Audrey Helena (California)

Wiebe, Richard R. (California)

Williams, Jamie (California)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Ahern, Paul Edward (District of Columbia)

Anderson, Caroline J (District of Columbia)

Bayse, Chad (Maryland)

Berman, Marcia (District of Columbia)

Coppolino, Anthony J. (District of Columbia)

Dearinger, Bryan (District of Columbia)

Freeborne, Paul Gerald (District of Columbia)

Gilligan, James J (District of Columbia)

Haas, Alexander K (District of Columbia)

Heiman, Julia Alexandra (District of Columbia)

Johnson, Timothy Andrew (District of Columbia)

Patton, Rodney (District of Columbia)

Scott, Olivia Hussey (District of Columbia)

Whitman, James R. (District of Columbia)

Other Attorney(s)

Brown, Bruce D. (Virginia)

Gellis, Catherine Rachel (California)

Koltun, Joshua (California)

Page, Michael Henry (California)

Siavoshy, Babak (California)

Urban, Jennifer M. (California)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

4:08-cv-04373

Docket [PACER]

Feb. 25, 2021

Feb. 25, 2021

Docket
1

4:08-cv-04373

Class Action Complaint

Jewel v. NSA

Sept. 17, 2008

Sept. 17, 2008

Complaint
18-1

08-04873

Classified Declaration of Dennis C. Blair Director of National Intelligence

April 3, 2009

April 3, 2009

Declaration/Affidavit

08-04873

Classified Declaration of Deborah A. Bonanni, National Intelligence Agency

Jewel v. NSA

April 3, 2009

April 3, 2009

Declaration/Affidavit
57

4:08-cv-04373

07-00693

06-01791

Order

Jan. 21, 2010

Jan. 21, 2010

Order/Opinion
75

10-15616

10-15638

Opinion

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Dec. 29, 2011

Dec. 29, 2011

Order/Opinion
83

4:08-cv-04373

Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Rejecting the Government Defendants' State Secret Defense

June 29, 2012

June 29, 2012

Pleading / Motion / Brief

08-04873

Classified Declaration of James R. Clapper Director of National Intelligence

Sept. 11, 2012

Sept. 11, 2012

Declaration/Affidavit

08-04873

Classified Declaration of Frances J. Fleisch, National Intelligence Agency

Jewel v. NSA

Sept. 11, 2012

Sept. 11, 2012

Declaration/Affidavit
113

4:08-cv-04373

Plaintiffs' Federal Rule of Evidence Section 1006 Summary of Voluminous Evidence Filed in Support of Their motion for Partial Summary Judgment and Opposition to the Government Defendants' Cross-Motion

Dec. 14, 2012

Dec. 14, 2012

Pleading / Motion / Brief

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4175713/jewel-v-national-security-agency/

Last updated Aug. 21, 2022, 3:02 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT against all defendants ( Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 34611023512.) SUMMONS ISSUED. Filed byGregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton, Tash Hepting. (mcl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/18/2008) (mcl, COURT STAFF). (Additional attachment(s) added on 8/20/2015: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet) (jlmS, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 09/18/2008)

1 Civil Cover Sheet

View on PACER

Sept. 18, 2008

Sept. 18, 2008

Clearinghouse

Case Referred to ECF

Sept. 18, 2008

Sept. 18, 2008

PACER
2

Certificate of Interested Entities or Persons by Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton, Tash Hepting. (mcl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/18/2008) (mcl, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 09/18/2008)

Sept. 18, 2008

Sept. 18, 2008

RECAP
3

ADR SCHEDULING ORDER: Case Management Statement due by 1/2/2009. Case Management Conference set for 1/9/2009 08:30 AM. (Attachments: # 1 Order setting CMC, # 2 Standing Order, # 3 CM Standing Order for All Judges)(mcl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/18/2008) (Entered: 09/18/2008)

Sept. 18, 2008

Sept. 18, 2008

RECAP
4

Summons Issued as to National Security Agency, Keith B. Alexander, Michael V. Hayden, United States of America, George W. Bush, Richard B. Cheney, David S. Addington, Department of Justice, Alberto R. Gonzales, John D. Ashcroft, John M. McConnell, John D. Negroponte, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General. (mcl, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 09/18/2008)

Sept. 18, 2008

Sept. 18, 2008

RECAP

CASE DESIGNATED for Electronic Filing. (mcl, COURT STAFF)

Sept. 18, 2008

Sept. 18, 2008

PACER
5

CLERKS NOTICE re: Failure to E-File and/or Failure to Register as an E-Filer. (mcl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/7/2008) (Entered: 10/07/2008)

Oct. 7, 2008

Oct. 7, 2008

RECAP
6

Letter dated 9/21/08 from James Alfred Miller, Jr. (mcl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/7/2008) (Entered: 10/09/2008)

Oct. 7, 2008

Oct. 7, 2008

RECAP
7

MOTION to Relate Case Administrative Motion by Plaintiffs to Consider Whether Cases Should be Related; Declaration of Kevin S. Bankston; Proof of Service filed by Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton, Tash Hepting. (Bankston, Kevin) (Filed on 10/21/2008) (Entered: 10/21/2008)

Oct. 21, 2008

Oct. 21, 2008

RECAP
8

Proposed Order re 7 MOTION to Relate Case Administrative Motion by Plaintiffs to Consider Whether Cases Should be Related; Declaration of Kevin S. Bankston; Proof of Service ; Deeming Cases Related and Assigning Jewel to MDL Docket No. 06-1791 VRW, In Re National Security Agency Telecommunications Records Litigation by Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton, Tash Hepting. (Bankston, Kevin) (Filed on 10/21/2008) (Entered: 10/21/2008)

Oct. 21, 2008

Oct. 21, 2008

RECAP
9

ORDER by Chief Judge Vaughn R Walker granting 7 Motion to Relate Case. C06-0672 and C08-4373 are related. LR3-12. (cgk, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/28/2008) (Entered: 10/28/2008)

Oct. 28, 2008

Oct. 28, 2008

RECAP

Create Case Association

Oct. 28, 2008

Oct. 28, 2008

PACER

Cases associated: Create association to 3:06-cv-00672-VRW. (cgk, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/28/2008)

Oct. 28, 2008

Oct. 28, 2008

PACER

Case Reassigned to Judge Hon. Vaughn R. Walker. Judge Hon. Charles R. Breyer no longer assigned to the case. (as, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/29/2008)

Oct. 29, 2008

Oct. 29, 2008

PACER

Case Assigned/Reassigned

Oct. 29, 2008

Oct. 29, 2008

PACER
10

NOTICE of Appearance by Alexander Kenneth Haas (Haas, Alexander) (Filed on 11/26/2008) (Entered: 11/26/2008)

Nov. 26, 2008

Nov. 26, 2008

RECAP
11

STIPULATION by National Security Agency, Keith B. Alexander, United States of America, George W. Bush, Department of Justice, John M. McConnell. (Haas, Alexander) (Filed on 11/26/2008) (Entered: 11/26/2008)

Nov. 26, 2008

Nov. 26, 2008

RECAP
12

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton, Tash Hepting of Summons and Complaint (Bankston, Kevin) (Filed on 12/15/2008) (Entered: 12/15/2008)

Dec. 15, 2008

Dec. 15, 2008

RECAP
13

NOTICE of Appearance by James R. Whitman on behalf of the individual capacity defendants (Whitman, James) (Filed on 1/23/2009) (Entered: 01/23/2009)

Jan. 23, 2009

Jan. 23, 2009

RECAP
14

NOTICE of Appearance by Paul Gerald Freeborne on behalf of federal defendants sued in their official capacity and the other agency defendants (Freeborne, Paul) (Filed on 1/23/2009) (Entered: 01/23/2009)

Jan. 23, 2009

Jan. 23, 2009

RECAP
15

MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re 1 Complaint, filed by National Security Agency, Keith B. Alexander, Michael V. Hayden, United States of America, George W. Bush, Richard B. Cheney, David S. Addington, Department of Justice, Alberto R. Gonzales, John D. Ashcroft, John M. McConnell, John D. Negroponte, Michael B. Mukasey. (Freeborne, Paul) (Filed on 1/26/2009) (Entered: 01/26/2009)

Jan. 26, 2009

Jan. 26, 2009

RECAP
16

MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re 1 Complaint, (CORRECTED VERSION) filed by National Security Agency, Keith B. Alexander, Michael V. Hayden, United States of America, George W. Bush, Richard B. Cheney, David S. Addington, Department of Justice, Alberto R. Gonzales, John D. Ashcroft, John M. McConnell, John D. Negroponte, Michael B. Mukasey. (Haas, Alexander) (Filed on 1/26/2009) (Entered: 01/26/2009)

Jan. 26, 2009

Jan. 26, 2009

RECAP
17

ORDER by Judge Vaughn R Walker GRANTING Docs #15, 16, Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. All defendants shall answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint on or before 4/3/2009. The 3/26/2009 hearing is vacated. (cgk, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/30/2009) (Entered: 01/30/2009)

Jan. 30, 2009

Jan. 30, 2009

RECAP
18

MOTION to Dismiss, MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Barack Obama, Eric Holder, Dennis C Blair, National Security Agency, Keith B. Alexander, United States of America, Department of Justice. Motion Hearing set for 6/25/2009 02:30 PM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix of Exhibits, # 2 Affidavit Public Declaration of DNI Dennis C. Blair, # 3 Affidavit Declaration of Deborah A. Bonanni, National Security Agency)(Coppolino, Anthony) (Filed on 4/3/2009) (Entered: 04/03/2009)

1 Appendix of Exhibits

View on PACER

2 Affidavit Public Declaration of DNI Dennis C. Blair

View on PACER

3 Affidavit Declaration of Deborah A. Bonanni, National Security Agency

View on RECAP

April 3, 2009

April 3, 2009

RECAP
19

NOTICE by Barack Obama, Eric Holder, Dennis C Blair, National Security Agency, Keith B. Alexander, United States of America, Department of Justice re 18 MOTION to Dismiss MOTION for Summary Judgment Notice of Lodging of Classified In Camera Ex Parte Declaration of Dennis C. Blair, Director of National Intelligence (Coppolino, Anthony) (Filed on 4/3/2009) (Entered: 04/03/2009)

April 3, 2009

April 3, 2009

RECAP
20

NOTICE by Barack Obama, Eric Holder, Dennis C Blair, National Security Agency, Keith B. Alexander, United States of America, Department of Justice re 18 MOTION to Dismiss MOTION for Summary Judgment Notice of Lodging of Classified In Camera Ex Parte Declaration of Deborah A. Bonanni, National Security Agency (Coppolino, Anthony) (Filed on 4/3/2009) (Entered: 04/03/2009)

April 3, 2009

April 3, 2009

RECAP
21

NOTICE by Barack Obama, Eric Holder, Dennis C Blair, National Security Agency, Keith B. Alexander, United States of America, Department of Justice re 18 MOTION to Dismiss MOTION for Summary Judgment Notice of Lodging of Classified In Camera Ex Parte Supplemental Memorandum of Government Defendants in Support of Motion to Dismiss and for Summary Judgment (Coppolino, Anthony) (Filed on 4/3/2009) (Entered: 04/03/2009)

April 3, 2009

April 3, 2009

RECAP
22

MOTION Individual capacity defendants' motion for administrative relief to enlarge the time to answer or otherwise respond to plaintiffs' complaint filed by Keith B. Alexander, Michael V. Hayden, George W. Bush, Richard B. Cheney, David S. Addington, Alberto R. Gonzales, John D. Ashcroft, John M. McConnell, John D. Negroponte, Michael B. Mukasey. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Declaration of James R. Whitman, # 2 Proposed Order)(Whitman, James) (Filed on 4/3/2009) (Entered: 04/03/2009)

April 3, 2009

April 3, 2009

RECAP
23

Memorandum in Opposition to Individual Capacity Defendants' 22 Motion for Administrative relief to Enlarge the Time to Answer or Otherwise Respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint filed by Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton, Tash Hepting. (Cohn, Cindy) (Filed on 4/8/2009) Modified on 4/9/2009 (slh, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 04/08/2009)

April 8, 2009

April 8, 2009

RECAP
24

Proposed Order re 23 Memorandum in Opposition, to Individual Capacity Defendants' Motion for Administrative Relief to Enlarge the Time to Answer or Otherwise Respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint by Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton, Tash Hepting. (Cohn, Cindy) (Filed on 4/8/2009) (Entered: 04/08/2009)

April 8, 2009

April 8, 2009

RECAP
25

ORDER by Judge Vaughn R Walker denying without prejudice 22 motion to enlarge time to answer or otherwise respond to plaintiffs' complaint. Individual defendants shall have until June 25, 2009 within which to answer or otherwise respond. (vrwlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/27/2009) (Entered: 04/27/2009)

April 27, 2009

April 27, 2009

RECAP
26

STIPULATION to Revise Hearing Date and to Set Briefing Schedule by Barack Obama, Eric Holder, Dennis C Blair, National Security Agency, Keith B. Alexander, United States of America, Department of Justice. (Coppolino, Anthony) (Filed on 5/1/2009) (Entered: 05/01/2009)

May 1, 2009

May 1, 2009

RECAP
27

ORDER approving 26 Stipulation, filed by United States of America, at al. In addition, date established by 25 Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief by which individual government defendants shall answer or otherwise respond is also hereby extended to July 15, 2009. Signed by Judge Vaughn R Walker on 5/8/2009. (vrwlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/8/2009) (Entered: 05/08/2009)

May 8, 2009

May 8, 2009

RECAP

Set/Reset Hearings

May 8, 2009

May 8, 2009

PACER

Set/Reset Hearings: Opposition due: 6/3/2009. Govt's Reply due: 6/26/2009. Motion Hearing set for 7/15/2009 10:30 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco. (cgk, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/8/2009)

May 8, 2009

May 8, 2009

PACER
28

NOTICE of Appearance by Rachael Elizabeth Meny Paula A. Blizzard, Michael S. Kwun, and Audrey Walton-Hadlock (Meny, Rachael) (Filed on 6/2/2009) (Entered: 06/02/2009)

June 2, 2009

June 2, 2009

RECAP
29

Memorandum in Opposition re 18 MOTION to Dismiss MOTION for Summary Judgment Plaintiffs' Opposition to Government Defendants' Motion to Dismiss and for Summary Judgment filed byGregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton, Tash Hepting. (Meny, Rachael) (Filed on 6/3/2009) (Entered: 06/03/2009)

June 3, 2009

June 3, 2009

RECAP
30

DECLARATION of Cindy Cohn in Opposition to 29 Memorandum in Opposition, Declaration of Cindy Cohn Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f) in Opposition to Government Defendants' Motion to Dismiss and For Summary Judgment filed byGregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton, Tash Hepting. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Related document(s) 29 ) (Meny, Rachael) (Filed on 6/3/2009) (Entered: 06/03/2009)

June 3, 2009

June 3, 2009

RECAP
31

Reply to Opposition re 18 MOTION to Dismiss MOTION for Summary Judgment Government Defendants' Reply in Support of Motion to Dismiss and for Summary Judgment filed byKeith B. Alexander, Dennis C Blair, Department of Justice, Eric Holder, National Security Agency, Barack Obama, United States of America. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibits to Government Defendants' Reply)(Coppolino, Anthony) (Filed on 6/26/2009) (Entered: 06/26/2009)

June 26, 2009

June 26, 2009

RECAP
32

MOTION Individual capacity defendants' motion for relief from the Court's Orders of April 27, 2009, and May 8, 2009 filed by David S. Addington, Keith B. Alexander, John D. Ashcroft, George W. Bush, Richard B. Cheney, Alberto R. Gonzales, Michael V. Hayden, John M. McConnell, Michael B. Mukasey, John D. Negroponte. Motion Hearing set for 9/17/2009 10:00 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Whitman, James) (Filed on 7/10/2009) (Entered: 07/10/2009)

July 10, 2009

July 10, 2009

RECAP
33

MOTION Administrative Relief from Improper Motion for Reconsideration by Individual Capacity Defendants filed by Tash Hepting, Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton. Motion Hearing set for 7/15/2009 10:00 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco. (Cohn, Cindy) (Filed on 7/13/2009) (Entered: 07/13/2009)

July 13, 2009

July 13, 2009

RECAP
34

Declaration of Cindy A. Cohn in Support of 33 MOTION Administrative Relief from Improper Motion for Reconsideration by Individual Capacity Defendants filed byTash Hepting, Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton. (Related document(s) 33 ) (Cohn, Cindy) (Filed on 7/13/2009) (Entered: 07/13/2009)

July 13, 2009

July 13, 2009

RECAP
35

NOTICE by Tash Hepting, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN OPPOSITION TO GOVERNMENT DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS AND FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Exhibit)(Blizzard, Paula) (Filed on 7/13/2009) (Entered: 07/13/2009)

1

View on RECAP

July 13, 2009

July 13, 2009

RECAP
36

Minute Entry: Motion Hearing held on 7/15/2009 before Chief Judge Vaughn R Walker. 1. Def's Motion to Dismiss and for Summary Judgment (Doc 18). 2. Motion for Relief filed by Individual Capacity Defendants (Doc 32)-not argued. 3. Plas' Motion for Administrative Relief (Doc 33). The Court heard argument from counsel. The Court submitted the matter. The court to issue written ruling. Hearing on Government Individual Capacity Defendants motion for relief (doc 32) set for 9/17/2009 at 10:00 AM. (Court Reporter Lydia Zinn.) (cgk, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 7/15/2009) (Entered: 07/21/2009)

July 15, 2009

July 15, 2009

RECAP
37

Transcript of Proceedings held on 07/15/2009, before Judge Vaughn R. Walker. Court Reporter/Transcriber Lydia Radovich Zinn, Telephone number (415) 531-6587. Per General Order No. 59 and Judicial Conference policy, this transcript may be viewed only at the Clerks Office public terminal or may be purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber until the deadline for the Release of Transcript Restriction.After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Any Notice of Intent to Request Redaction, if required, is due no later than 5 business days from date of this filing. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 10/26/2009. (Zinn, Lydia) (Filed on 7/31/2009) (Entered: 07/31/2009)

July 31, 2009

July 31, 2009

RECAP
38

MOTION for Leave to File Supplemental Brief on the Scope of FISA Act Preemption filed by Tash Hepting, Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement Supplemental Memorandum on the Scope of FISA Act Preemption, # 2 Affidavit Wiebe Declaration ISO Supplemental Memorandum, # 3 Exhibit A to Wiebe Decl., # 4 Exhibit B to Wiebe Decl., # 5 Exhibit C to Wiebe Decl., # 6 Exhibit D to Wiebe Decl., # 7 Exhibit E to Wiebe Decl., # 8 Proposed Order Allowing Supplemental Memorandum)(Blizzard, Paula) (Filed on 8/3/2009) (Entered: 08/03/2009)

1

View on RECAP

2

View on RECAP

3

View on RECAP

4

View on RECAP

5

View on RECAP

6

View on RECAP

7

View on RECAP

Aug. 3, 2009

Aug. 3, 2009

RECAP
39

Declaration of Cindy A. Cohn in Support of 38 MOTION for Leave to File Supplemental Brief on the Scope of FISA Act Preemption filed byTash Hepting, Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton. (Related document(s) 38 ) (Blizzard, Paula) (Filed on 8/3/2009) (Entered: 08/03/2009)

Aug. 3, 2009

Aug. 3, 2009

RECAP
40

ORDER by Judge Vaughn R Walker granting 38 motion for leave to file post-hearing brief. Defendants may file a brief on the same subject and of no greater length on or before 9/3/2009. (vrwlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/4/2009) (Entered: 08/04/2009)

Aug. 4, 2009

Aug. 4, 2009

RECAP
41

STIPULATION to Set Briefing Schedule by David S. Addington, Keith B. Alexander, John D. Ashcroft, George W. Bush, Richard B. Cheney, Alberto R. Gonzales, Michael V. Hayden, John M. McConnell, Michael B. Mukasey, John D. Negroponte. (Whitman, James) (Filed on 8/5/2009) (Entered: 08/05/2009)

Aug. 5, 2009

Aug. 5, 2009

RECAP
42

Memorandum in Opposition to Individual Capacity Defendants' Motion for Relief filed byTash Hepting, Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton. (Bankston, Kevin) (Filed on 8/24/2009) (Entered: 08/24/2009)

Aug. 24, 2009

Aug. 24, 2009

RECAP
43

STIPULATION to Extend Time to Respond to Supplemental Brief (Dkt. 38-1) and Proposed Order by Keith B. Alexander, Dennis C Blair, Department of Justice, Eric Holder, National Security Agency, Barack Obama, United States of America. (Coppolino, Anthony) (Filed on 9/1/2009) (Entered: 09/01/2009)

Sept. 1, 2009

Sept. 1, 2009

RECAP
44

Reply in support re 32 MOTION Individual capacity defendants' motion for relief from the Court's Orders of April 27, 2009, and May 8, 2009 filed byDavid S. Addington, Keith B. Alexander, John D. Ashcroft, George W. Bush, Richard B. Cheney, Alberto R. Gonzales, Michael V. Hayden, John M. McConnell, Michael B. Mukasey, John D. Negroponte. (Whitman, James) (Filed on 9/3/2009) Modified on 9/4/2009 (ys, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 09/03/2009)

Sept. 3, 2009

Sept. 3, 2009

RECAP
45

Statement of Non-Opposition re 32 MOTION Individual capacity defendants' motion for relief from the Court's Orders of April 27, 2009, and May 8, 2009 Statement in Support of Individual Capacity Defs.' Motion for Relief from Court Orders filed byKeith B. Alexander, Dennis C Blair, Department of Justice, Eric Holder, National Security Agency, Barack Obama, United States of America. (Related document(s) 32 ) (Berman, Marcia) (Filed on 9/3/2009) (Entered: 09/03/2009)

Sept. 3, 2009

Sept. 3, 2009

RECAP
46

Reply Memorandum Government Defendants' Response to Plaintiffs' Supplemental Brief (Dkt. 38-1) filed byDennis C Blair, Department of Justice, Eric Holder, National Security Agency, Barack Obama, United States of America. (Coppolino, Anthony) (Filed on 9/4/2009) (Entered: 09/04/2009)

Sept. 4, 2009

Sept. 4, 2009

RECAP
47

Minute Entry: Motion Hearing re doc #s 32 and 33 held on 9/17/2009 before Chief Judge Vaughn R Walker, the court submitted the matter. (Date Filed: 9/17/2009). (Court Reporter Jim Yeomans.) (cgk, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 9/17/2009) (Entered: 09/21/2009)

Sept. 17, 2009

Sept. 17, 2009

RECAP
48

NOTICE by United States of America of Order by Court of Appeals Granting Rehearing En Banc (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2)(Ahern, Paul) (Filed on 10/28/2009) (Entered: 10/28/2009)

1

View on RECAP

Oct. 28, 2009

Oct. 28, 2009

Clearinghouse
49

NOTICE by United States of America Withdrawal of Appearance (Haas, Alexander) (Filed on 11/6/2009) (Entered: 11/06/2009)

Nov. 6, 2009

Nov. 6, 2009

RECAP
50

Joint MOTION for Entry of Order Regarding Preservation of Evidence filed by United States of America. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, Dkt. 393 in 06-cv-1791-VRW, # 2 Proposed Order)(Ahern, Paul) (Filed on 11/10/2009) (Entered: 11/10/2009)

1

View on RECAP

Nov. 10, 2009

Nov. 10, 2009

RECAP
51

ORDER by Chief Judge Vaughn R Walker GRANTING doc [#50] JOINT MOTION FOR ENTRY OF ORDER REGARDING PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE. Counsel representing each party shall, not later than 12/15/2009, submit to the Court under seal and pursuant to FRCP 11, a statement that the directive in paragraph D, has been carried out. (cgk, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/16/2009) (Entered: 11/16/2009)

Nov. 16, 2009

Nov. 16, 2009

RECAP
52

NOTICE by Tash Hepting, Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton of Manual Filing (Bankston, Kevin) (Filed on 12/15/2009) (Entered: 12/15/2009)

Dec. 15, 2009

Dec. 15, 2009

RECAP
53

NOTICE by United States of America re 51 Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief, Notice of Manual Filing (Ahern, Paul) (Filed on 12/15/2009) (Entered: 12/15/2009)

Dec. 15, 2009

Dec. 15, 2009

RECAP
67

Response to the Court's Order of 11/13/09 regarding preservation of evidence byNational Security Agency. (far, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/15/2009) (hdjS, COURT STAFF). Modified on 4/8/2014 (hdjS, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 07/21/2010)

Dec. 15, 2009

Dec. 15, 2009

PACER
68

FILED UNDER SEAL Response of the individual capacity defendants to the court's order of 11/13/09 regarding preservation of evidence by. (far, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/15/2009) (jlmS, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 07/21/2010)

Dec. 15, 2009

Dec. 15, 2009

PACER
69

FILED UNDER SEAL Declaration of Kevin S. Bankston in compliance with preservation order filed byPlaintiffs. (far, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/15/2009) (jlmS, COURT STAFF). (Additional attachment(s) added on 7/16/2019: # 1 ) (cjlS, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 07/21/2010)

Dec. 15, 2009

Dec. 15, 2009

PACER
54

NOTICE by David S. Addington, Keith B. Alexander, John D. Ashcroft, George W. Bush, Richard B. Cheney, Alberto R. Gonzales, Michael V. Hayden, John M. McConnell, Michael B. Mukasey, John D. Negroponte re 51 Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief, Notice of Manual Filing (Whitman, James) (Filed on 12/17/2009) (Entered: 12/17/2009)

Dec. 17, 2009

Dec. 17, 2009

RECAP
55

NOTICE by Tash Hepting, Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton re 18 MOTION to Dismiss MOTION for Summary Judgment, Plaintiffs' Local Rule 7-13 Notice That Government Defendants' Motion Has Been Under Submission More Than 120 Days (Wiebe, Richard) (Filed on 12/23/2009) (Entered: 12/23/2009)

Dec. 23, 2009

Dec. 23, 2009

RECAP
56

AMENDED DOCUMENT by Carolyn Jewel. Amendment to Substitute Yoo & Goldsmith for Does 1 & 2. (Moore, Thomas) (Filed on 1/20/2010) (Entered: 01/20/2010)

1

View on RECAP

2

View on RECAP

3

View on RECAP

Jan. 20, 2010

Jan. 20, 2010

RECAP
57

ORDER by Judge Vaughn R. Walker granting 18 Motion to Dismiss; granting motion to dismiss in MDL Docket No. 3:06-cv-1791 VRW (member case no. 3:07-cv-0693 VRW) (Attachments: # 1 Appendix) (hlk, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/21/2010) (Entered: 01/21/2010)

1 Appendix

View on RECAP

Jan. 21, 2010

Jan. 21, 2010

Clearinghouse
58

JUDGMENT. IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that in accordance with the Court's January 21, 2010 Order, judgment is hereby entered in this case in favor of defendants and against plaintiffs. (cgk, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/25/2010) (Entered: 01/25/2010)

Jan. 25, 2010

Jan. 25, 2010

RECAP
59

NOTICE of Change of Address by Richard R. Wiebe (Wiebe, Richard) (Filed on 1/28/2010) (Entered: 01/28/2010)

Jan. 28, 2010

Jan. 28, 2010

RECAP
60

ORDER re 57 1/21/2010 Order on Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Vaughn R. Walker on 2/4/2010. (hlk, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/4/2010) (Entered: 02/04/2010)

Feb. 4, 2010

Feb. 4, 2010

RECAP
61

NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 58 Judgment, 57 Order on Motion to Dismiss, Order on Motion for Summary Judgment, Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief, by Tash Hepting, Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton. Filing fee $ 455, Receipt Number 34611043712.(far, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/19/2010) (Entered: 03/22/2010)

March 19, 2010

March 19, 2010

RECAP
62

Copy of Notice of Appeal and Docket sheet mailed to all counsel (Attachments: # 1 docket sheet)(far, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/22/2010) (Entered: 03/22/2010)

March 22, 2010

March 22, 2010

PACER
63

Transmission of Notice of Appeal and Docket Sheet to US Court of Appeals re 61 Notice of Appeal, (Attachments: # 1 docket sheet, # 2 cover letter, # 3 USCA appeal notification form)(far, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/23/2010) (Entered: 03/23/2010)

March 23, 2010

March 23, 2010

PACER
64

Transcript of Proceedings held on 09/12/09, before Judge Vaughn R. Walker. Court Reporter/Transcriber James Yeomans, Telephone number (415) 863-5179. Per General Order No. 59 and Judicial Conference policy, this transcript may be viewed only at the Clerks Office public terminal or may be purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber until the deadline for the Release of Transcript Restriction.After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Any Notice of Intent to Request Redaction, if required, is due no later than 5 business days from date of this filing. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 7/21/2010. (jjy, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/22/2010) (Entered: 04/22/2010)

April 22, 2010

April 22, 2010

PACER
65

USCA Case Number 10-15616 9th Circuit for 61 Notice of Appeal, filed by Gregory Hicks, Tash Hepting, Erik Knutzen, Carolyn Jewel, Joice Walton. (far, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/26/2010) (Entered: 04/26/2010)

April 26, 2010

April 26, 2010

PACER
66

ORDER of USCA as to 61 Notice of Appeal, filed by Gregory Hicks, Tash Hepting, Erik Knutzen, Carolyn Jewel, Joice Walton (far, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/8/2010) (Entered: 06/08/2010)

June 8, 2010

June 8, 2010

PACER
70

ORDER of USCA (far, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/7/2011) (Entered: 02/07/2011)

Feb. 7, 2011

Feb. 7, 2011

RECAP
71

ORDER of USCA as to 61 Notice of Appeal, filed by Gregory Hicks, Tash Hepting, Erik Knutzen, Carolyn Jewel, Joice Walton (far, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/6/2011) (Entered: 04/06/2011)

April 6, 2011

April 6, 2011

RECAP
72

ORDER of USCA as to 61 Notice of Appeal, filed by Gregory Hicks, Tash Hepting, Erik Knutzen, Carolyn Jewel, Joice Walton (far, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/6/2011) (Entered: 04/06/2011)

April 6, 2011

April 6, 2011

RECAP
73

ORDER of USCA (far, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/19/2011) (Entered: 08/19/2011)

Aug. 19, 2011

Aug. 19, 2011

RECAP
74

ORDER of USCA (far, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/19/2011) (Entered: 09/19/2011)

Sept. 19, 2011

Sept. 19, 2011

RECAP
75

USCA OPINION. (far, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/12/2012) (Entered: 01/12/2012)

Jan. 12, 2012

Jan. 12, 2012

RECAP
76

NOTICE of Change In Counsel by Cindy Ann Cohn Withdrawal of Kevin Bankston (Cohn, Cindy) (Filed on 1/31/2012) (Entered: 01/31/2012)

Jan. 31, 2012

Jan. 31, 2012

RECAP
77

MANDATE of USCA (far, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/23/2012) (Entered: 02/23/2012)

Feb. 23, 2012

Feb. 23, 2012

RECAP
78

CLERKS Letter Spreading Mandate to Counsel (far, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/23/2012) (Entered: 02/23/2012)

Feb. 23, 2012

Feb. 23, 2012

RECAP
79

Letter from Plaintiffs requesting assignment to a District Court judge. (Cohn, Cindy) (Filed on 5/9/2012) (Entered: 05/09/2012)

May 9, 2012

May 9, 2012

RECAP
80

ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Hon. Thelton E. Henderson for all further proceedings. Judge Hon. Vaughn R. Walker no longer assigned to the case.. Signed by Executive Committee on 5/15/12. (as, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/15/2012) (Entered: 05/15/2012)

May 15, 2012

May 15, 2012

RECAP
81

ORDER OF RECUSAL. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 05/17/12. (tehlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/17/2012) (Entered: 05/17/2012)

May 17, 2012

May 17, 2012

RECAP
82

ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Hon. Jeffrey S. White for all further proceedings. Judge Hon. Thelton E. Henderson no longer assigned to the case.. Signed by Executive Committee on 5/18/12. (as, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/18/2012) (Entered: 05/18/2012)

May 18, 2012

May 18, 2012

RECAP
83

MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment Rejecting the Government Defendants' State Secret Defense filed by Tash Hepting, Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton. Motion Hearing set for 11/2/2012 09:00 AM in Courtroom 11, 19th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Jeffrey S. White. Responses due by 7/16/2012. Replies due by 7/23/2012. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Wiebe, Richard) (Filed on 7/2/2012) (Entered: 07/02/2012)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

July 2, 2012

July 2, 2012

Clearinghouse
84

Administrative Motion to File Under Seal filed by Tash Hepting, Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration, # 2 Declaration, # 3 Exhibit A to Klein Decl, # 4 Exhibit B Klein Decl, # 5 Exhibit C Part 1 Klein Decl, # 6 Exhibit C Part 2 Klein Decl, # 7 Proposed Order)(Wiebe, Richard) (Filed on 7/2/2012) (Entered: 07/02/2012)

1 *Restricted*

View on PACER

2 *Restricted*

View on PACER

3 *Restricted*

View on PACER

4 *Restricted*

View on PACER

5 *Restricted*

View on PACER

6 *Restricted*

View on PACER

7 Proposed Order

View on PACER

July 2, 2012

July 2, 2012

RECAP
85

Declaration of Mark Klein in Support of 83 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment Rejecting the Government Defendants' State Secret Defense filed byTash Hepting, Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton. (Related document(s) 83 ) (Wiebe, Richard) (Filed on 7/2/2012) (Entered: 07/02/2012)

July 2, 2012

July 2, 2012

RECAP
86

Declaration of J. Kirk Wiebe in Support of 83 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment Rejecting the Government Defendants' State Secret Defense filed byTash Hepting, Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton. (Related document(s) 83 ) (Wiebe, Richard) (Filed on 7/2/2012) (Entered: 07/02/2012)

July 2, 2012

July 2, 2012

PACER
87

Declaration of Thomas A. Drake in Support of 83 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment Rejecting the Government Defendants' State Secret Defense filed byTash Hepting, Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton. (Related document(s) 83 ) (Wiebe, Richard) (Filed on 7/2/2012) (Entered: 07/02/2012)

July 2, 2012

July 2, 2012

PACER
88

Declaration of William E. Binney in Support of 83 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment Rejecting the Government Defendants' State Secret Defense filed byTash Hepting, Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton. (Related document(s) 83 ) (Wiebe, Richard) (Filed on 7/2/2012) (Entered: 07/02/2012)

July 2, 2012

July 2, 2012

RECAP
89

Declaration of J. Scott Marcus in Support of 83 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment Rejecting the Government Defendants' State Secret Defense filed byTash Hepting, Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A-D, # 2 Exhibit E, # 3 Exhibit F, # 4 Exhibit G, # 5 Exhibit H-K, # 6 Exhibit L-N, # 7 Exhibit O-Q, # 8 Exhibit R, # 9 Exhibit S, # 10 Exhibit T-V, # 11 Exhibit W-Y)(Related document(s) 83 ) (Wiebe, Richard) (Filed on 7/2/2012) (Entered: 07/02/2012)

July 2, 2012

July 2, 2012

RECAP
90

Declaration of Cindy Cohn in Support of 83 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment Rejecting the Government Defendants' State Secret Defense filed byTash Hepting, Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton. (Related document(s) 83 ) (Cohn, Cindy) (Filed on 7/2/2012) (Entered: 07/02/2012)

July 2, 2012

July 2, 2012

PACER
91

STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER re 83 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment Rejecting the Government Defendants' State Secret Defense Stipulation to Set Briefing Schedule filed by Tash Hepting, Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton. (Cohn, Cindy) (Filed on 7/2/2012) (Entered: 07/02/2012)

July 2, 2012

July 2, 2012

PACER
92

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Tash Hepting, Gregory Hicks, Carolyn Jewel, Erik Knutzen, Joice Walton re 84 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal (Wiebe, Richard) (Filed on 7/2/2012) (Entered: 07/02/2012)

July 2, 2012

July 2, 2012

PACER

Case Details

State / Territory: California

Case Type(s):

National Security

Special Collection(s):

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act -- All Matters

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act -- Telephony Metadata

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act—Internet Metadata

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Sept. 18, 2008

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

All present and future United States persons who have been or will be subject to electronic surveillance by the National Security Agency without a search warrant or court order since September 12, 2001

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Pending

Defendants

United States , Federal

Defendant Type(s):

Jurisdiction-wide

Law-enforcement

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Ex Parte Young (Federal) or Bivens

Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq.

Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201

FISA Title I Warrant (Electronic Surveillance), 50 U.S.C. §§ 1801-1812

FISA Title IV order (pen register/trap-and-trace), 50 U.S.C. §§ 1841-1846

FISA Title V order (PATRIOT Act § 215, business records or other tangible things), 50 U.S.C. §§ 1861-1862

Constitutional Clause(s):

Freedom of speech/association

Unreasonable search and seizure

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: None Yet / None

Nature of Relief:

None yet

Source of Relief:

None yet

Issues

General:

Record-keeping

Records Disclosure

Terrorism/Post 9-11 issues

Type of Facility:

Government-run