Case: In Re Application of Zayn Al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah)

02:17-cv-00171 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington

Filed Date: May 22, 2017

Closed Date: May 3, 2022

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This case is focused on Zayn Al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (aka Abu Zubaydah; “petitioner”) and the international legal effort to hold accountable those believed to have interrogated and tortured him at a CIA “black site” in Poland. Mr. Husayn was also one of many petitioners who filed for a writ of habeas corpus in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia while detained at the United States military prison at Guantanamo Bay. For more information on the Guantanamo Bay detainees’ habeas …

This case is focused on Zayn Al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (aka Abu Zubaydah; “petitioner”) and the international legal effort to hold accountable those believed to have interrogated and tortured him at a CIA “black site” in Poland. Mr. Husayn was also one of many petitioners who filed for a writ of habeas corpus in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia while detained at the United States military prison at Guantanamo Bay. For more information on the Guantanamo Bay detainees’ habeas petitions, please see In Re Guantanamo Bay Detainee Litigation.

Husayn, a stateless Palestianian suspected of holding a leadership position in a foreign terrorist organization, was captured in March 2002 by U.S. and Pakistani agents. He has since been indefinitely held by the U.S. military as an “enemy combatant.” After his capture and before being transferred to Guantanamo Bay, petitioner was held in various CIA blacks sites in foreign countries where he was subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques illegal in the U.S. Husayn was imprisoned in a black site in Poland from December 2002 to September 2003. In 2013, his attorneys filed an application against the Republic of Poland before the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). The application alleged that Poland failed to conduct a full and proper investigation into violations of international and domestic Polish law after Husayn filed a complaint in Poland in 2010. In 2014, the ECHR found that the Polish government’s original criminal investigation of Polish officials’ complicity in the operation of the black site was inadequate, prompting Poland to reopen the investigation. Unable to give direct testimony in the Polish criminal investigation, Husayn filed an ex parte application for discovery with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington seeking service of subpoenas to two respondents. According to a publicly available report issued by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, respondents were two former CIA contractors known to have visited the Polish black site and believed to possess information relevant to the Polish government’s application. The application for discovery was filed on May 22, 2017 under 28 U.S.C. § 1782, a provision intended to facilitate the conduct of litigation in foreign courts and foster international cooperation in litigation. The case was initially assigned to Judge Justin L. Quackenbush.

On May 31, 2017, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) notified the court that it was considering participating in Husayn’s district court case due to U.S. national security and foreign policy concerns. Under 28 U.S.C. § 517, the Attorney General may send any officer of the DOJ to represent the legal interests of the United States in any state or district court. DOJ officially submitted a statement of interest on June 30, 2017 seeking 60 days to assess whether to assert applicable privileges, including the state secrets privilege. 

The government’s statement outlined the four factors (“the Intel factors”) identified by the Supreme Court in Intel Corp. v. AMD, Inc., 542 U.S. 241, 264 (2004) for a district court’s discretion in granting a 28 U.S.C. § 1782 discovery application: (1) whether the person from whom discovery is sought is a participant in the proceeding; (2) the nature of the foreign tribunal, the character of the proceedings underway abroad, and the receptivity of the foreign government to U.S. federal court assistance; (3) whether the discovery request is an attempt to circumvent foreign proof-gathering restrictions or other policies of a foreign country or the government; and (4) whether the discovery request is unduly burdensome. The government argued that granting petitioner’s application for a subpoena would be unduly burdensome because petitioner’s parameters were too broad and complying with a subpoena would require a significant allocation of resources to assessing what information needed to remain privileged. The government also argued that, contrary to the spirit of 28 U.S.C. § 1782, issuing the subpoenas would discourage foreign governments from cooperating with the U.S., undermining national security and foreign policy interests. According to the government, the mutual legal assistance treaty (MLAT) with Poland provided a proper channel for the information Husayn sought. In a response filed July 21, 2017, Husayn argued that the government mischaracterized him as an agent of the Polish government rather than an individual seeking vindication of his personal rights. 

The court granted Husayn’s application for discovery on September 7, 2017. After reviewing the Intel factors and finding the government’s argument that the subpoenas would prove unduly burdensome premature, the court granted petitioners leave to serve respondents with subpoenas. The court was skeptical of the government’s argument regarding the MLAT with Poland given that the United States had already refused requests for more information from the Polish government. 

On October 24, 2017, DOJ filed a motion to intervene in the case, seeking a protective order and to quash the subpoenas served to respondents. Asserting state secrets privilege, then CIA Director Michael Pompeo claimed that the government’s interests in national security were not adequately represented by any of the original parties and that the court lacked jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (the Military Commissions Act or MCA). The MCA prevents courts from exercising jurisdiction in an action against the U.S. “relating to any aspect of the detention, transfer, treatment, trial, or conditions of confinement of an alien who is or was detained by the United States and has been determined…to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant.” Husayn objected to the motion to quash but did not respond to the government’s motion to intervene. 

The court granted the government’s motion to intervene on February 21, 2018, but rejected its jurisdiction-stripping argument. The court applied the Ninth Circuit’s five element test for determining whether a court lacks jurisdiction under the MCA: (1) the action is against the U.S. or its agents; (2) the action relates to any aspect of the detention, transfer, treatment, trial or conditions of confinement of a non-U.S. citizen (“alien”); (3) the action relates to an enemy combatant; (4) the action is other than an application for writ of habeas corpus; and (5) the action does not qualify for an exception under the Detainee Treatment Act. Applying the five element test, the court held that the MCA did not strip it of jurisdiction. The action was not filed against the U.S., the government failed to establish that respondents were agents of the U.S., and the government did not produce evidence that petitioner was properly deemed an enemy combatant. However, the court did hold that the state secrets privilege applied and quashed the subpoenas accordingly. The court then dismissed the case, finding that discovery could not proceed without presenting an unacceptable risk of disclosing state secrets. 2018 WL 11150135.

Petitioner appealed on March 15, 2018. On September 18, 2019, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed in part and reversed in part, in an opinion authored by Judge Paez. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s holding that certain kinds of information sought by petitioner, like “documents, memoranda, and correspondence about the identities and roles of foreign individuals involved with the detention facility” were privileged but nonetheless held that the district court should not have dismissed the case. Applying the three-step test set out by the Supreme Court in United States v. Reynolds, the court: (1) reviewed whether the procedural requirements for invoking the state secrets were satisfied; (2) determined whether the information at issue was privileged; and (3) considered how the case should proceed in light of a successful privilege claim. Husayn did not dispute that the procedural requirements were satisfied, leaving the court to concentrate on the second and third questions. The Ninth Circuit held that the CIA’s enhanced interrogation program was not a state secret and that other facts related to petitioner’s detention already made public were not protected under the state secrets privilege. Though the identities and roles of foreign individuals were protected by state secrets privilege, the Ninth Circuit found that the district court did not make a sufficient effort to disentangle privileged and nonprivileged information before dismissing petitioner’s case. Respondents had previously provided the kind of nonprivileged information sought by petitioners, illustrating that disentangling privileged and nonprivileged information was possible and that the nonprivileged information could be useful to Polish investigators. 938 F.3d 1123.

The government sought rehearing en banc, but it was denied. The case was reassigned to Judge Thomas Owen Rice at the district court level on July 30, 2020. On December 17, 2020, the government filed a petition for a writ of certiorari. 141 S.Ct. 2564 (Mem).

The Supreme Court granted the petition for writ of certiorari, the first time in 50 years that the Court considered the scope of the state secrets privilege. Husayn’s case was argued before the Supreme Court on October 6, 2021. On March 3, 2022, the Court reversed the Ninth Circuit’s decision and remanded the case, holding that the government provided sufficient support to warrant applying the state secrets privilege. Justice Breyer wrote the opinion of the Court, with the exception of Parts II-B-2 and III. (Part II-B-2 discussed an analogy to FOIA requests that the government made in its argument that confirmation by respondents of events already made public could significantly harm national security interests, an argument Justice Breyer found credible.) The Court identified three problematic topics into which the Ninth Circuit allowed continued discovery: (1) the existence of a CIA detention facility in Poland; (2) the conditions of confinement and interrogation at that facility; and (3) petitioner’s treatment at that location.  Applying the Reynolds test, assessing the strength of petitioner’s claim of necessity, and mindful of the Court’s “traditional reluctance” to interfere with Executive authority in military and national security affairs, the Court found that a response to subpoenas would confirm or deny the existence of a CIA detention site in Poland and that the government met the requisite burden to assert state secrets privilege over the existence of the site. 142 S.Ct. 959.

The opinion was fractured, but parts III and IV held a majority. Justice Kagan dissented in part, agreeing that the location of a potential CIA facility fell within the scope of the state secrets privilege but finding dismissal of Mr. Zubaydah’s suit improper due to his primary interest in obtaining testimony on what happened to him in his cell (distinguishing the “where” from the “what”). Justice Kagan noted precedent for segregating the classified location information from the unclassified treatment information and allowing discovery into the latter. Justice Gorsuch, joined in his dissent by Justice Sotomayor, questioned the government’s argument that state secrets were at stake given the extent of information already public about Mr. Zubaydah’s torture and detention. Justice Gorsuch suggested that the government’s motivation for dismissal was to “impede the Polish criminal investigation and avoid (or at least delay) further embarrassment for past misdeeds.” 142 S.Ct. 959.

This case is now closed.

Summary Authors

Hannah Juge (8/7/2022)

Related Cases

In Re: Guantanamo Bay Detainee Litigation, District of Columbia (2008)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

20-00827

Supreme Court Docket

Supreme Court of the United States

April 4, 2022

April 4, 2022

Docket
1

02:17-cv-00171

Ex Parte Application For Discovery Order Pursuant To 28 U.S.C. § 1782 In Aid Of Foreign Proceeding

May 22, 2017

May 22, 2017

Complaint
7

02:17-cv-00171

United States Notice of Potential Application

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

Notice Letter
11

02:17-cv-00171

Statement of Interest of the United States

June 30, 2017

June 30, 2017

Other
23

02:17-cv-00171

Order Granting Application for Discovery

Sept. 7, 2017

Sept. 7, 2017

Order/Opinion
29

02:17-cv-00171

United States' Motion to Intervene

Oct. 24, 2017

Oct. 24, 2017

Pleading / Motion / Brief
39

02:17-cv-00171

Order RE Motion to Quash and Motion to Intervene

Feb. 21, 2018

Feb. 21, 2018

Order/Opinion

18-35218

Ninth Circuit Opinion

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

July 20, 2020

July 20, 2020

Order/Opinion

20-00827

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 17, 2020

Dec. 17, 2020

Pleading / Motion / Brief

20-00827

Brief in Opposition for Respondents Abu Zubaydah and Joseph Marguiles

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 11, 2021

Feb. 11, 2021

Pleading / Motion / Brief

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6262970/zayn-al-abidin-muhammad-husayn/

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

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR DISCOVERY ORDER PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. ยง 1782 IN AID OF FOREIGN PROCEEDING against Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah), Joseph Margulies ( Filing fee $ 400; Receipt # 0980-2615844) Filed by Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah), Joseph Margulies. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix Subpoena ad Testificandum - Jessen, # 2 Appendix Subpoena Duces Tecum - Jessen, # 3 Appendix Subpoena ad Testificandum - Mitchell, # 4 Appendix Subpoena Duces Tecum - Mitchell, # 5 Text of Proposed Order, # 6 Civil Cover Sheet)(Moberg, Jerry) (Entered: 05/22/2017)

1 Appendix Subpoena ad Testificandum - Jessen

View on PACER

2 Appendix Subpoena Duces Tecum - Jessen

View on PACER

3 Appendix Subpoena ad Testificandum - Mitchell

View on PACER

4 Appendix Subpoena Duces Tecum - Mitchell

View on PACER

5 Text of Proposed Order

View on PACER

6 Civil Cover Sheet

View on PACER

May 22, 2017

May 22, 2017

Clearinghouse
2

DECLARATION OF JOSEPH MARGULIES IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS' EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR DISCOVERY ORDER PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. ยง 1782 IN AID OF FOREIGN PROCEEDING by Joseph Margulies re 1 Complaint by Joseph Margulies, Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah). (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G)(AY, Case Administrator) (Entered: 05/22/2017)

May 22, 2017

May 22, 2017

PACER

Notice of Judge Assignment. Senior Judge Justin L. Quackenbush assigned to case. (AY, Case Administrator)

May 22, 2017

May 22, 2017

PACER
3

MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice re Attorney: David Klein. Filing fee $ 200, receipt number 0980-2616961. by Joseph Margulies, Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah). Motion Hearing set for 6/21/2017 Without Oral Argument before Senior Judge Justin L. Quackenbush. (Moberg, Jerry) (Entered: 05/22/2017)

May 22, 2017

May 22, 2017

PACER
4

MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice re Attorney: John Chamberlain. Filing fee $ 200, receipt number 0980-2616977. by Joseph Margulies, Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah). Motion Hearing set for 6/21/2017 Without Oral Argument before Senior Judge Justin L. Quackenbush. (Moberg, Jerry) (Entered: 05/22/2017)

May 22, 2017

May 22, 2017

PACER
5

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR PRO HAC VICE PARTICIPATION granting 3 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Added Attorney David F Klein,John Chamberlain for Joseph Margulies,David F Klein,John Chamberlain for Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah); granting 4 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Added Attorney David F Klein,John Chamberlain for Joseph Margulies,David F Klein,John Chamberlain for Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah) Signed by Senior Judge Justin L. Quackenbush. (VR, Courtroom Deputy) (Entered: 05/23/2017)

May 23, 2017

May 23, 2017

PACER
6

NOTICE of Appearance by Andrew Irwin Warden on behalf of United States of America (Attorney Andrew Irwin Warden added to party United States of America(pty:ip))(Warden, Andrew) (Entered: 05/31/2017)

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

PACER
7

NOTICE by United States of America of Potential Participation (Warden, Andrew) (Entered: 05/31/2017)

May 31, 2017

May 31, 2017

Clearinghouse
8

Consent MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages For Statement of Interest by United States of America. Motion Hearing set for 6/29/2016 Without Oral Argument before Senior Judge Justin L. Quackenbush. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Warden, Andrew) (Entered: 06/22/2017)

June 22, 2017

June 22, 2017

PACER
9

Consent MOTION to Expedite Consideration of Unopposed Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages for Statement of Interest by United States of America. Motion Hearing set for 6/29/2017 Without Oral Argument before Senior Judge Justin L. Quackenbush. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Warden, Andrew) (Entered: 06/22/2017)

June 22, 2017

June 22, 2017

PACER
10

ORDER RE: MOTION FOR OVERLENGTH STATEMENT granting 8 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages; granting 9 Motion to Expedite. Signed by Senior Judge Justin L. Quackenbush. (AY, Case Administrator) (Entered: 06/23/2017)

June 23, 2017

June 23, 2017

PACER
11

STATEMENT of Interest by United States of America. (Warden, Andrew) (Entered: 06/30/2017)

June 30, 2017

June 30, 2017

Clearinghouse
12

DECLARATION of Andrew Warden re 11 Statement by United States of America. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3)(Warden, Andrew) (Entered: 06/30/2017)

June 30, 2017

June 30, 2017

PACER
13

MOTION CONSENT MOTION FOR LEAVE TO RESPOND TO THE UNITED STATES STATEMENT OF INTEREST AND FOR LEAVE TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION re 11 Statement by Joseph Margulies, Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah). Motion Hearing set for 8/7/2017 Without Oral Argument before Senior Judge Justin L. Quackenbush. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Moberg, Jerry) (Entered: 07/05/2017)

July 5, 2017

July 5, 2017

PACER
14

MOTION to Expedite MOTION FOR LEAVE TO RESPOND TO U.S. STATEMENT OF INTEREST AND LEAVE TO EXCEED PAGE LIMIT by Joseph Margulies, Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah). Motion Hearing set for 7/12/2017 Without Oral Argument before Senior Judge Justin L. Quackenbush. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Moberg, Jerry) (Entered: 07/05/2017)

July 5, 2017

July 5, 2017

PACER
15

ORDER RE: RESPONSE TO STATEMENT OF INTEREST granting 13 Motion ; granting 14 Motion to Expedite. Signed by Senior Judge Justin L. Quackenbush. (AY, Case Administrator) (Entered: 07/06/2017)

July 6, 2017

July 6, 2017

PACER
16

RESPONSE re 11 Statement of Interest by the United States of America by Joseph Margulies, Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah). (Moberg, Jerry) (Entered: 07/21/2017)

July 21, 2017

July 21, 2017

RECAP
17

DECLARATION of John Chamberlain in Support of Petitioners' Response to the United States' Statement of Interest re 11 Statement, 16 Response by Joseph Margulies, Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah). (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Moberg, Jerry) (Entered: 07/21/2017)

July 21, 2017

July 21, 2017

PACER
18

DECLARATION of Bartlomiej Jankowski in Support of Petitioners' Response to the United States' Statement of Interest re 11 Statement, 16 Response by Joseph Margulies, Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah). (Moberg, Jerry) (Entered: 07/21/2017)

July 21, 2017

July 21, 2017

RECAP
19

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO SERVE SUBPOENAS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO SET HEARING DATE by Joseph Margulies, Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah). Motion Hearing set for 9/5/2017 Without Oral Argument before Senior Judge Justin L. Quackenbush. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Moberg, Jerry) (Entered: 08/04/2017)

1 Text of Proposed Order

View on PACER

Aug. 4, 2017

Aug. 4, 2017

PACER
20

Praecipe filed by Joseph Margulies, Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah): Re 19 MOTION FOR LEAVE TO SERVE SUBPOENAS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO SET HEARING DATE . Description: Incorrect Dates on signature and certificate of service. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Moberg, Jerry) (Entered: 08/04/2017)

Aug. 4, 2017

Aug. 4, 2017

PACER
21

MEMORANDUM of Points and Authorities in Opposition re 19 MOTION FOR LEAVE TO SERVE SUBPOENAS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO SET HEARING DATE filed by United States of America. (Warden, Andrew) (Entered: 08/18/2017)

Aug. 18, 2017

Aug. 18, 2017

RECAP
22

REPLY MEMORANDUM re 19 MOTION FOR LEAVE TO SERVE SUBPOENAS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO SET HEARING DATE filed by Joseph Margulies, Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah). (Moberg, Jerry) (Entered: 08/22/2017)

Aug. 22, 2017

Aug. 22, 2017

PACER
23

ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION 19 FOR DISCOVERY. Signed by Senior Judge Justin L. Quackenbush. (AY, Case Administrator) (Entered: 09/07/2017)

Sept. 7, 2017

Sept. 7, 2017

Clearinghouse
24

NOTICE by Joseph Margulies, Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah) re 23 Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief -Proof of Service of Subpoenas and Compliance with Order (Moberg, Jerry) (Entered: 10/05/2017)

Oct. 5, 2017

Oct. 5, 2017

PACER
25

NOTICE of Appearance by Christopher W Tompkins on behalf of James Elmer Mitchell, John Jessen (Attorney Christopher W Tompkins added to party James Elmer Mitchell(pty:res), Attorney Christopher W Tompkins added to party John Jessen(pty:res))(Tompkins, Christopher) (Entered: 10/16/2017)

Oct. 16, 2017

Oct. 16, 2017

PACER
26

Joint MOTION For Scheduling Order To Address Forthcoming Motions To Quash And For Protective Order By The United States by United States of America. Motion Hearing set for 10/24/2017 Without Oral Argument before Senior Judge Justin L. Quackenbush. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Warden, Andrew) (Entered: 10/18/2017)

Oct. 18, 2017

Oct. 18, 2017

PACER
27

Joint MOTION to Expedite Consideration Of Joint Motion For Scheduling Order by United States of America. Motion Hearing set for 10/24/2017 Without Oral Argument before Senior Judge Justin L. Quackenbush. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Warden, Andrew) (Entered: 10/18/2017)

Oct. 18, 2017

Oct. 18, 2017

PACER
28

ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE. Motions terminated: 27 Joint MOTION to Expedite Consideration Of Joint Motion For Scheduling Order filed by United States of America, 26 Joint MOTION For Scheduling Order To Address Forthcoming Motions To Quash And For Protective Order By The United States filed by United States of America. Telephonic Argument Re: Motion to Quash/for Protective Order set for 11/28/2017 at 10:00 AM before Senior Judge Justin L. Quackenbush. Signed by Senior Judge Justin L. Quackenbush. (AY, Case Administrator) (Entered: 10/20/2017)

Oct. 20, 2017

Oct. 20, 2017

PACER
29

MOTION to Intervene by United States of America. Motion Hearing set for 11/28/2017 at 10:00 AM Spokane Courtroom 903 Teleconference before Senior Judge Justin L. Quackenbush. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Warden, Andrew) (Entered: 10/24/2017)

1 Text of Proposed Order

View on PACER

Oct. 24, 2017

Oct. 24, 2017

Clearinghouse
30

MOTION to Quash Subpoenas Issued To James Mitchell and John "Bruce" Jessen and, MOTION for Protective Order ( Motion Hearing set for 11/28/2017 at 10:00 AM Spokane Courtroom 903 Teleconference before Senior Judge Justin L. Quackenbush.) by United States of America. (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 9, # 10 Text of Proposed Order)(Warden, Andrew) (Entered: 10/24/2017)

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 9

View on PACER

10 Text of Proposed Order

View on PACER

Oct. 24, 2017

Oct. 24, 2017

RECAP
31

RESPONSE to Motion re 30 MOTION to Quash Subpoenas Issued To James Mitchell and John "Bruce" Jessen and MOTION for Protective Order filed by Joseph Margulies, Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah). (Moberg, Jerry) (Entered: 11/06/2017)

Nov. 6, 2017

Nov. 6, 2017

PACER
32

DECLARATION by John Chamberlain in Opposition re 30 MOTION to Quash Subpoenas Issued To James Mitchell and John "Bruce" Jessen and MOTION for Protective Order filed by Joseph Margulies, Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah). (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E)(Moberg, Jerry) (Entered: 11/06/2017)

Nov. 6, 2017

Nov. 6, 2017

PACER
33

Praecipe filed by Joseph Margulies, Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah): Re 32 Declaration in Opposition to Motion, 31 Response to Motion,. Description: Local Counsel's signature added to document, as well as Certificate of Service. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E)(Moberg, Jerry) (Entered: 11/07/2017)

Nov. 7, 2017

Nov. 7, 2017

PACER
34

REPLY MEMORANDUM re 30 MOTION to Quash Subpoenas Issued To James Mitchell and John "Bruce" Jessen and MOTION for Protective Order filed by United States of America. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Dalbey Declaration)(Warden, Andrew) (Entered: 11/13/2017)

Nov. 13, 2017

Nov. 13, 2017

PACER
35

STATEMENT Filed Jointly By Petitioners and the United States Pursuant To Local Rule 37.1 by United States of America. (Warden, Andrew) (Entered: 11/14/2017)

Nov. 14, 2017

Nov. 14, 2017

PACER
36

NOTICE by Joseph Margulies, Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah) re 30 MOTION to Quash Subpoenas Issued To James Mitchell and John "Bruce" Jessen and MOTION for Protective Order, 34 Reply Memorandum, NOTICE OF ADDITIONAL AUTHORITY TO BE REFERENCED AT ORAL ARGUMENT (Moberg, Jerry) (Entered: 11/27/2017)

Nov. 27, 2017

Nov. 27, 2017

PACER
37

Minute Entry for TELEPHONIC proceedings held before Senior Judge Justin L. Quackenbush: Motion Hearing held on 11/28/2017 re 29 MOTION to Intervene filed by United States of America and 30 MOTION to Quash Subpoenas. (Reported/Recorded by: Mark A. Snover) (JLK, Courtroom Deputy) (Entered: 11/28/2017)

Nov. 28, 2017

Nov. 28, 2017

RECAP
38

Praecipe filed by Joseph Margulies, Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah): Re 31 Response to Motion, 1 Complaint,,. Description: Supplemental information as requested by the Court. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement Supplemental Declaration of Bartlomiej Jankowski)(Moberg, Jerry) (Entered: 12/11/2017)

1 Supplement Supplemental Declaration of Bartlomiej Jankowski

View on PACER

Dec. 11, 2017

Dec. 11, 2017

PACER
39

ORDER RE: MOTION 30 TO QUASH AND MOTION 29 TO INTERVENE. Signed by Senior Judge Justin L. Quackenbush. (AY, Case Administrator) (Entered: 02/21/2018)

Feb. 21, 2018

Feb. 21, 2018

Clearinghouse
40

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL ACTION. (AY, Case Administrator) (Entered: 02/21/2018)

Feb. 21, 2018

Feb. 21, 2018

RECAP
41

NOTICE OF FILING OF OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT of Motion Hearing. Proceedings held on 11-28-17 in Spokane, Washington before Senior Judge Justin L. Quackenbush. Page Numbers: 1-43 Parties have seven (7) business days to file with the court a Notice of Intent to Request Redaction of this transcript. If no such Notice is filed, the transcript may be made remotely electronically available to the public without redaction after 90 calendar days. 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. Information regarding the policy can be found on the court website at www.waed.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/transcript_policy_notice_20130215.pdf. To purchase a copy of the transcript contact Court Reporter/Transcriber Mark A. Snover at 509-458-3434. Redaction Request due 3/30/2018. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 4/9/2018. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 6/7/2018. (Snover, Mark) (Entered: 03/09/2018)

March 9, 2018

March 9, 2018

PACER
42

LODGED NOTICE OF APPEAL from District Court decision as to 40 Clerk's Judgment, 39 Order Closing File, Terminate Motions by Joseph Margulies, Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah). Filing fee $ 505, receipt number 0980-2841434. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Moberg, Jerry) (Entered: 03/15/2018)

March 15, 2018

March 15, 2018

PACER
43

PETITIONERS' NOTICE OF APPEAL from District Court decision as to 40 Clerk's Judgment, 39 Order Re Motion to Quash and Motion to Intervene by Joseph Margulies, Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah) cc: Court Reporter: Mark Snover. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(AY, Case Administrator) Modified on 3/19/2018 (9cca No. 18-35218) (VR, Courtroom Deputy). (Entered: 03/16/2018)

March 15, 2018

March 15, 2018

PACER
44

9CCA Payment Notification form re 43 Notice of Appeal. Received $505, receipt number 0980-2841434. (AY, Case Administrator) (Entered: 03/16/2018)

March 15, 2018

March 15, 2018

PACER
45

Letter from Appeal Deputy Clerk to Counsel dated 03/16/2018. (Attachments: # 1 Petitioners' Notice of Appeal, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 PACER Docket Sheet)(AY, Case Administrator) (Entered: 03/16/2018)

March 16, 2018

March 16, 2018

PACER
46

9CCA Appeal Time Schedule and Case Number: 18-35218 for 43 Notice of Appeal, filed by Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah), Joseph Margulies. Designation Due: 4/16/18. Transcript Due: 5/14/18. Opening Brief Due: 6/25/18. Appellees Brief Due: 7/25/18. Mediation Questionnaire Due: 3/26/18. cc: Court Reporter: Mark Snover. (VR, Courtroom Deputy) (Entered: 03/19/2018)

March 19, 2018

March 19, 2018

PACER
47

TRANSCRIPT DESIGNATION of Record on Appeal by Joseph Margulies, Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah) re 43 Notice of Appeal,. Date Appeal Filed: 03/15/18. Court Reporter: Mark Snover,. 9CCA: 18-35218. (Moberg, Jerry) (Entered: 04/13/2018)

April 13, 2018

April 13, 2018

PACER
48

9CCA Slip Opinion

Sept. 18, 2019

Sept. 18, 2019

PACER
49

9CCA Order

Jan. 15, 2020

Jan. 15, 2020

PACER
50

9CCA Order

July 20, 2020

July 20, 2020

PACER
51

9CCA Mandate

July 28, 2020

July 28, 2020

PACER

Order Reassigning Case

July 30, 2020

July 30, 2020

PACER
53

Scheduling Conference Notice

Aug. 18, 2020

Aug. 18, 2020

PACER
54

Notice of Appearance

Aug. 27, 2020

Aug. 27, 2020

PACER
55

Stay

Aug. 27, 2020

Aug. 27, 2020

PACER
56

~Util - Set/Clear Flags AND 1 - Terminate Deadlines and Hearings AND Order AND ~Util - Terminate Motions

Sept. 3, 2020

Sept. 3, 2020

PACER
57

Notice - Other

Dec. 18, 2020

Dec. 18, 2020

PACER
58

Certiorari Document

Dec. 22, 2020

Dec. 22, 2020

PACER
59

Certiorari Document

April 28, 2021

April 28, 2021

PACER
60

Certiorari Document

March 8, 2022

March 8, 2022

PACER
61

Certiorari Document

April 5, 2022

April 5, 2022

PACER
62

9CCA Order (Act as Mandate)

April 25, 2022

April 25, 2022

PACER

Order Closing File

April 25, 2022

April 25, 2022

PACER
64

9CCA Mandate

May 3, 2022

May 3, 2022

PACER

Case Details

State / Territory: Washington

Case Type(s):

National Security

Key Dates

Filing Date: May 22, 2017

Closing Date: May 3, 2022

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Zayn Al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (Abu Zubaydah) has been detained by the U.S. government as an "enemy combatant" since 2002 and is currently being detained in Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

United States Department of Justice (- United States (national) -), Federal

Case Details

Special Case Type(s):

Warrant or subpoena application

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Non-settlement Outcome

Any published opinion

U.S. Supreme Court merits opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

None

Issues

General:

International law

Torture

Type of Facility:

Government-run