Case: Public Citizen, Inc. v. Trump

Lentini v. Department of Government Efficiency

Lentini v. Department of Government Efficiency

Lentini v. Department of Government Efficency

Lentini v. Department of Government Efficency

President Donald Trump

COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 405 receipt number ADCDC-11416485) filed by PUBLIC CITIZEN, INC., AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, STATE DEMOCRACY DEFENDERS FUND. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Summons Atty Gen, # 3 Summons Donald Trump, # 4 Summons OMB, # 5 Summons USAO - DC)(Joshi, Nandan) (Entered: 01/20/2025)

1 Civil Cover Sheet

View on RECAP

2 Summons Atty Gen

View on RECAP

3 Summons Donald Trump

View on RECAP

4 Summons OMB

View on RECAP

5 Summons USAO - DC

View on RECAP

LCvR 26.1 CERTIFICATE OF DISCLOSURE of Corporate Affiliations and Financial Interests by PUBLIC CITIZEN, INC. (Joshi, Nandan) (Entered: 01/20/2025)

LCvR 26.1 CERTIFICATE OF DISCLOSURE of Corporate Affiliations and Financial Interests by STATE DEMOCRACY DEFENDERS FUND (Joshi, Nandan) (Entered: 01/20/2025)

NOTICE of Appearance by Nicolas Sansone on behalf of All Plaintiffs (Sansone, Nicolas) (Entered: 01/20/2025)

Case Assigned to Judge Jia M. Cobb. (zmtm)

SUMMONS (4) Issued Electronically as to OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET, DONALD J. TRUMP, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (Attachments: # 1 Notice and Consent)(zmtm) (Entered: 01/21/2025)

1 Notice and Consent

View on RECAP

NOTICE OF RELATED CASE by All Plaintiffs. Case related to Case No. 25-166 & 25-167. (Joshi, Nandan) (Entered: 01/21/2025)

RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed as to the United States Attorney. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney on 1/21/2025. Answer due for ALL FEDERAL DEFENDANTS by 3/22/2025. (Joshi, Nandan) (Entered: 01/22/2025)

NOTICE of Appearance by Bradley P. Humphreys on behalf of All Defendants (Humphreys, Bradley) (Entered: 01/31/2025)

NOTICE of Appearance by Anna Lynn Deffebach on behalf of All Defendants (Deffebach, Anna) (Entered: 02/04/2025)

MOTION to Consolidate Cases by DONALD J. TRUMP, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Humphreys, Bradley) (Entered: 02/04/2025)

1 Text of Proposed Order

View on PACER

LEAVE TO FILE DENIED- Harold P. Kupersmit, Notice of Intervention This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. Pro Se party has been notified by first class mail. "Leave to File Denied, This Motion does not comply with local civil rule 7(m).". Signed by Judge Jia M. Cobb on 2/13/2025. (zdp) (Entered: 02/14/2025)

LEAVE TO FILE DENIED- Harold P. Kupersmit, DOGE This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. Pro Se party has been notified by first class mail. "Leave to file DENIED. This motion does not comply with Local Civil Rule 7(m)". Signed by Judge Jia M. Cobb on 2/13/2025. (zdp) (Entered: 02/14/2025)

Memorandum in opposition to re 10 Motion to Consolidate Cases filed by PUBLIC CITIZEN, INC., STATE DEMOCRACY DEFENDERS FUND, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Joshi, Nandan) (Entered: 02/18/2025)

1 Text of Proposed Order

View on RECAP

MINUTE ORDER granting 10 Motion to Consolidate Cases: Defendants move to consolidate Case Nos. 25-cv-164, 25-cv-166, and 25-cv-167. Having considered the motion 10 and Plaintiffs' opposition 13, the Court GRANTS the motion. The parties shall make all future filings in this case (25-cv-164) and shall not "spread text."

MINUTE ORDER granting 10 Motion to Consolidate Cases: Defendants move to consolidate Case Nos. 25-cv-164, 25-cv-166, and 25-cv-167. Having considered the motion 10 and Plaintiffs' opposition 13, the Court GRANTS the motion. The parties shall make all future filings in this case (25-cv-164) and shall not "spread text." A district court may consolidate actions that "involve a common question of law or fact," Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a), which the parties agree is the case here. See ECF 13 at 3 ("As the government correctly observes, all three cases concern the applicability of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) to the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)."); ECF 10 at 3-4. Further, consolidating these three cases would "promote convenience and judicial economy, simplify management of the cases...and conserve judicial resources." Singh v. Carter, 185 F. Supp. 3d 11, 18 (D.D.C. 2016) (quoting Steele v. United States, No. 14-CV-1523, 2015 WL 4121607, at *2 (D.D.C. June 30, 2015)). Managing a single, streamlined docket allows the Court to communicate effectively with all parties simultaneously, especially given that all three cases are in a similar procedural posture.Plaintiffs' only objection to consolidation is that it would be difficult for them to "file joint papers and act as one going forward." ECF 13 at 3. Accordingly, and because each set of Plaintiffs represents a distinct group, the Court will consolidate these cases - but that does not require Plaintiffs to proceed as one. Each set of Plaintiffs will have leave to file its own motions and briefs unless the Court orders otherwise. Defendants may move for leave to file a single, consolidated response to Plaintiffs' pleadings or future motions, if they prefer, and the Court will grant Defendants leave to exceed the usual page limits if necessary. The Court will address any proposed limitations on discovery at any future scheduling conference. Signed by Judge Jia M. Cobb on February 18, 2025. (lcjmc2)

Cases Consolidated: The following cases have been consolidated with this case: 25cv166 and 25cv167. pursuant to Order on Motion to Consolidate Cases,. From this date forward, all pleadings shall be filed ONLY in this case. Parties are advised NOT to elect the SPREAD TEXT option when filing in ECF, as this will result in repetitive docketing. (zdp)

RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed on United States Attorney General. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney General 1/28/2025. (Joshi, Nandan) (Entered: 02/19/2025)

Remark- Consolidation

RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET served on 2/19/2025 (Joshi, Nandan) (Entered: 02/19/2025)

RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. DONALD J. TRUMP served on 2/19/2025 (Joshi, Nandan) (Entered: 02/19/2025)

MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice :Attorney Name- Skye L. Perryman, Filing fee $ 100, receipt number ADCDC-11497419. Fee Status: Fee Paid. by AMERICAN PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, MINORITY VETERANS OF AMERICA, VOTEVETS ACTION FUND, THE CENTER FOR AUTO SAFETY, INC., CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND ETHICS IN WASHINGTON. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Perryman Declaration, # 2 Exhibit Perryman DC Bar COGS, # 3 Text of Proposed Order)(Seel, Benjamin) (Entered: 02/21/2025)

1 Exhibit Perryman Declaration

View on RECAP

2 Exhibit Perryman DC Bar COGS

View on RECAP

3 Text of Proposed Order

View on RECAP

MINUTE ORDER granting 17 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice: Attorney Skye L. Perryman is hereby admitted pro hac vice to appear in this matter. Counsel should register for e-filing via PACER and file a notice of appearance pursuant to LCvR 83.6(a). Click for instructions. Signed by Judge Jia M. Cobb on February 21, 2025. (lcjmc2)

NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF APPEARANCE as to AMERICAN PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, MINORITY VETERANS OF AMERICA, VOTEVETS ACTION FUND, THE CENTER FOR AUTO SAFETY, INC., CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND ETHICS IN WASHINGTON. Attorney Benjamin M. Seel terminated. (Seel, Benjamin) (Entered: 02/24/2025)

NOTICE of Appearance by Skye Perryman on behalf of AMERICAN PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, MINORITY VETERANS OF AMERICA, VOTEVETS ACTION FUND, THE CENTER FOR AUTO SAFETY, INC., CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND ETHICS IN WASHINGTON (Perryman, Skye) (Entered: 02/24/2025)

MOTION for Discovery (Expedited) by JERALD LENTINI, JOSHUA ERLICH, NATIONAL SECURITY COUNSELORS. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(McClanahan, Kelly) (Entered: 03/03/2025)

1 Text of Proposed Order

View on RECAP

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal re Public Citizen, State Democracy Defenders Fund, and American Federation of Government Employees by PUBLIC CITIZEN, INC., STATE DEMOCRACY DEFENDERS FUND, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES (Joshi, Nandan) (Entered: 03/03/2025)

NOTICE OF ERROR regarding 20 MOTION for Discovery (Expedited). Please note the following for future filings: Documents in consolidated cases must include all relevant case numbers and case captions. Do not refile.(znmw)

NOTICE of New Evidence by JERALD LENTINI, JOSHUA ERLICH, NATIONAL SECURITY COUNSELORS re 20 Motion for Discovery (McClanahan, Kelly) (Entered: 03/04/2025)

MOTION to Expedite Briefing and Adjudication of Motion for Expedited Discovery by JERALD LENTINI, JOSHUA ERLICH, NATIONAL SECURITY COUNSELORS. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(McClanahan, Kelly) (Entered: 03/05/2025)

1 Text of Proposed Order

View on RECAP

.Order AND ~Util - Set/Reset Deadlines

NOTICE of Defendants' Position by JERALD LENTINI, JOSHUA ERLICH, NATIONAL SECURITY COUNSELORS re 23 Motion to Expedite (McClanahan, Kelly) (Entered: 03/05/2025)

Memorandum in opposition to re 23 Motion to Expedite filed by DONALD J. TRUMP, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Deffebach, Anna) (Entered: 03/05/2025)

1 Text of Proposed Order

View on RECAP

MINUTE ORDER: Plaintiffs have filed a motion 20 for expedited discovery. Defendants' response to that motion would otherwise be due March 17, 2025, but Plaintiffs have filed a motion 23 for expedited briefing - which they request that Defendants respond to by 12 PM tomorrow, March 6, 2025. Because Defendants have represented that they intend to respond to Plaintiffs' motion 23 for expedited briefing within 48 hours, see ECF 24, and the Court cannot discern any grounds in Plaintiffs' motion for any even more expeditious response, the Court ORDERS that Defendants shall file any opposition to Plaintiffs' 23 motion to expedite briefing by March 7, 2025. In addition to any arguments about the need for an expedited briefing schedule, Defendants' opposition shall include their position as to the earliest date by which Defendants could feasibly respond to Plaintiffs' motion 20 for expedited discovery. Signed by Judge Jia M. Cobb on March 5, 2025. (lcjmc2)

MINUTE ORDER denying 23 motion to expedite briefing: The Lentini Plaintiffs request expedited briefing on their 20 motion for expedited discovery, stating that "the factual background of this case is in a constant state of flux" and referencing a forthcoming motion for preliminary injunction. ECF 23 at 2. Plaintiffs have not explained, with clarity, the nature of any emergency here that would require the Court to compel Defendants to respond more rapidly than the default rules provide for. In any event, Defendants' counsel has indicated that, given counsel's upcoming deadlines in other matters, an expedited briefing schedule would be infeasible.

Order on Motion to Expedite AND Set/Reset Deadlines

MINUTE ORDER denying 23 motion to expedite briefing: The Lentini Plaintiffs request expedited briefing on their 20 motion for expedited discovery, stating that "the factual background of this case is in a constant state of flux" and referencing a forthcoming motion for preliminary injunction. ECF 23 at 2. Plaintiffs have not explained, with clarity, the nature of any emergency here that would require the Court to compel Defendants to respond more rapidly than the default rules provide for. In any event, Defendants' counsel has indicated that, given counsel's upcoming deadlines in other matters, an expedited briefing schedule would be infeasible. The Court therefore finds it appropriate to allow Defendants to respond to Plaintiffs' 20 motion for expedited discovery in the normal course. The Court ORDERS that Plaintiffs' 23 motion to expedite briefing is DENIED, and that Defendants shall file any opposition to Plaintiffs' 20 motion for expedited discovery by March 17, 2025. Plaintiffs are free to file any subsequent reply earlier than the default rules require so that the Court may rule expeditiously. It is further ORDERED that the parties shall confer and file a notice on the docket by March 12, 2025 indicating their mutual availability for a hearing on Plaintiffs' 20 motion, to be held once Plaintiffs' motion is fully briefed at the Court's discretion (should the Court determine that such a hearing would be appropriate and helpful after full briefing). Signed by Judge Jia M. Cobb on March 6, 2025. (lcjmc2)

NOTICE OF ERROR regarding 23 MOTION to Expedite Briefing and Adjudication of Motion for Expedited Discovery, 22 Notice (Other), 24 Notice Documents in consolidated cases must include all relevant case numbers and case captions. Do not refile(zdp)

NOTICE Joint Notice of Mutual Availability for a Hearing by DONALD J. TRUMP, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET (Deffebach, Anna) (Entered: 03/11/2025)

Joint MOTION for Briefing Schedule by DONALD J. TRUMP, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET. (Attachments: (1) Text of Proposed Order)(Deffebach, Anna)

1 Text of Proposed Order

View on RECAP

MINUTE ORDER granting 27 Joint Motion for Briefing Schedule: Having considered the motion, and for good cause shown, the Court GRANTS the motion and enters the following briefing schedule. Defendants shall file their motion to dismiss by April 11, 2025; Plaintiffs shall file their opposition(s) by May 13, 2025; and Defendants shall file any reply by May 28, 2025. Signed by Judge Jia M. Cobb on March 14, 2025. (lcjmc2)

Order on Motion for Briefing Schedule AND Set/Reset Deadlines

Memorandum in opposition to re 20 Motion for Discovery filed by DONALD J. TRUMP, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Humphreys, Bradley) (Entered: 03/17/2025)

1 Text of Proposed Order

View on RECAP

REPLY to opposition to motion re 20 Motion for Discovery filed by JERALD LENTINI, JOSHUA ERLICH, NATIONAL SECURITY COUNSELORS. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Thune email, # 2 Exhibit B - Miller-Meeks email, # 3 Exhibit C - Nehls letter)(McClanahan, Kelly) (Entered: 03/19/2025)

1 Exhibit A - Thune email

View on RECAP

2 Exhibit B - Miller-Meeks email

View on RECAP

3 Exhibit C - Nehls letter

View on RECAP

NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY by JERALD LENTINI, JOSHUA ERLICH, NATIONAL SECURITY COUNSELORS (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit D - Arnold letter)(McClanahan, Kelly) (Entered: 03/22/2025)

1 Exhibit D - Arnold letter

View on RECAP

ORDER denying 20 Lentini Plaintiffs' Motion for Expedited Discovery. See document for details. Signed by Judge Jia M. Cobb on March 25, 2025. (lcjmc2) (Entered: 03/25/2025)

NOTICE of Appearance by Samuel Holt on behalf of All Defendants (Holt, Samuel)

MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim by OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET, DONALD J. TRUMP. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Text of Proposed Order)(Holt, Samuel) (Entered: 04/11/2025)

1 Memorandum in Support

View on RECAP

2 Exhibit A

View on RECAP

3 Text of Proposed Order

View on PACER

NOTICE of Appearance by Aman Tewari George on behalf of AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, AMERICAN PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION, CENTER FOR AUTO SAFETY, INC., CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND ETHICS IN WASHINGTON, MINORITY VETERANS OF AMERICA, VOTEVETS ACTION FUND (George, Aman)

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, AMERICAN PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION, CENTER FOR AUTO SAFETY, INC., CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND ETHICS IN WASHINGTON, MINORITY VETERANS OF AMERICA, VOTEVETS ACTION FUND (George, Aman)

Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to [33] MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim by JOSHUA ERLICH, JERALD LENTINI, NATIONAL SECURITY COUNSELORS. (Attachments: (1) Text of Proposed Order)(McClanahan, Kelly)

1 Text of Proposed Order

View on PACER

MINUTE ORDER granting 36 Consent Motion for Extension of Time: Having considered the motion, and for good cause shown, the Court GRANTS the motion. It is further ORDERED that Plaintiffs shall file their opposition to Defendants' motion to dismiss by May 20, 2025, and that Defendants shall file their reply by June 4, 2025. It is further ORDERED that, in light of the parties' request, the Clerk of Court shall amend the case caption to read: Jerald Lentini et al. v. Department of Government Efficiency et al. Signed by Judge Jia M. Cobb on May 13, 2025. (lcjmc2)

Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 33 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim by JOSHUA ERLICH, JERALD LENTINI, NATIONAL SECURITY COUNSELORS. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(McClanahan, Kelly) (Entered: 05/20/2025)

1 Text of Proposed Order

View on PACER

MINUTE ORDER granting 37 Consent Motion for Extension of Time: Having considered the motion, and for good cause shown, the Court GRANTS the motion. It is further ORDERED that Plaintiffs shall file their opposition to Defendants' motion to dismiss by May 22, 2025, and that Defendants shall file their reply by June 11, 2025. Signed by Judge Jia M. Cobb on May 21, 2025. (lcjmc2)

Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply AND Set/Reset Deadlines

Emergency MOTION to Stay re 33 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim by JOSHUA ERLICH, JERALD LENTINI, NATIONAL SECURITY COUNSELORS. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(McClanahan, Kelly) (Entered: 05/21/2025)

1 Text of Proposed Order

View on PACER

Memorandum in opposition to re 33 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim filed by JOSHUA ERLICH, JERALD LENTINI, NATIONAL SECURITY COUNSELORS. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - NAACP v. Barr transcript, # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(McClanahan, Kelly) (Entered: 05/23/2025)

1 Exhibit A - NAACP v. Barr transcript

View on PACER

2 Text of Proposed Order

View on PACER

Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 33 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim (Nunc Pro Tunc) by JOSHUA ERLICH, JERALD LENTINI, NATIONAL SECURITY COUNSELORS. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(McClanahan, Kelly) (Entered: 05/23/2025)

1 Text of Proposed Order

View on PACER

MINUTE ORDER: Plaintiffs have filed an emergency motion 38 to stay this case pending the Supreme Court's resolution of the government's pending motion to stay the District Court's orders in Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington v. U.S. DOGE Service, No. 25-cv-511 (D.D.C.). Because the Court perceives no emergency here, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendants shall file any response to Plaintiffs' stay motion by June 4, 2025, consistent with the Local Civil Rules. Signed by Judge Jia M. Cobb on May 27, 2025. (lcjmc2)

.Order AND ~Util - Set/Reset Deadlines

Memorandum in opposition to re 38 Emergency MOTION to Stay re 33 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim filed by DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET, DONALD J. TRUMP. (Humphreys, Bradley) (Entered: 05/30/2025)

MINUTE ORDER denying 38 Motion to Stay and granting 40 Consent Motion for Extension of Time: Plaintiffs move to stay briefing on Defendants' motion to dismiss, pending the Supreme Court's resolution of the government's pending motion to stay the District Court's orders in Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington v. U.S. DOGE Service, No. 25-cv-511 (D.D.C.) ("CREW"). ECF 38. To the extent that Plaintiffs sought only to stay briefing on Defendants' pending motion, that request is moot because Plaintiffs have now filed their opposition and Defendants' motion to dismiss is nearly ripe. To the extent that Plaintiffs seek to stay this case as a general matter, the Court does not find that such a stay is necessary at this time. The issue presently before the Supreme Court in CREW is whether to stay the District Court's discovery orders - so the Supreme Court may not even reach the underlying merits questions. See Application to Stay at 1, In re U.S. DOGE Service, No. 24A1122. And even if the Supreme Court does reach the underlying merits, it seems unlikely that CREW would prove dispositive in this case. The key issue in CREW is whether the U.S. DOGE Service ("USDS") is an "agency" subject to FOIA. See CREW, No. 25-cv-511, 2025 WL 752367, at 1 (D.D.C. Mar. 10, 2025), reconsideration denied,, 2025 WL 863947 (D.D.C. Mar. 19, 2025). Plaintiffs' theory (as described by their Amended Complaint) is that there is an advisory committee called DOGE, "separate and distinct from [USDS]," that does not comply with federal law. And Plaintiffs have sued DOGE, not USDS. So, under Plaintiffs' own theory, whether USDS is or is not an agency should have little bearing on whether a "separate and distinct" body is an advisory committee. The Court therefore finds no need to stay this case pending proceedings in CREW.

Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply AND Order on Motion to Stay

MINUTE ORDER denying 38 Motion to Stay and granting 40 Consent Motion for Extension of Time: Plaintiffs move to stay briefing on Defendants' motion to dismiss, pending the Supreme Court's resolution of the government's pending motion to stay the District Court's orders in Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington v. U.S. DOGE Service, No. 25-cv-511 (D.D.C.) ("CREW"). ECF 38. To the extent that Plaintiffs sought only to stay briefing on Defendants' pending motion, that request is moot because Plaintiffs have now filed their opposition and Defendants' motion to dismiss is nearly ripe. To the extent that Plaintiffs seek to stay this case as a general matter, the Court does not find that such a stay is necessary at this time. The issue presently before the Supreme Court in CREW is whether to stay the District Court's discovery orders - so the Supreme Court may not even reach the underlying merits questions. See Application to Stay at 1, In re U.S. DOGE Service, No. 24A1122. And even if the Supreme Court does reach the underlying merits, it seems unlikely that CREW would prove dispositive in this case. The key issue in CREW is whether the U.S. DOGE Service ("USDS") is an "agency" subject to FOIA. See CREW, No. 25-cv-511, 2025 WL 752367, at *1 (D.D.C. Mar. 10, 2025), reconsideration denied,, 2025 WL 863947 (D.D.C. Mar. 19, 2025). Plaintiffs' theory (as described by their Amended Complaint) is that there is an advisory committee called DOGE, "separate and distinct from [USDS]," that does not comply with federal law. And Plaintiffs have sued DOGE, not USDS. So, under Plaintiffs' own theory, whether USDS is or is not an agency should have little bearing on whether a "separate and distinct" body is an advisory committee. The Court therefore finds no need to stay this case pending proceedings in CREW. Because the Court has denied Plaintiffs' motion to stay, and for good cause shown, Plaintiffs' 40 Consent Motion for Extension of Time is GRANTED nunc pro tunc, and Plaintiffs' 39 opposition is accepted as filed. Signed by Judge Jia M. Cobb on June 3, 2025. (lcjmc2)

REPLY to opposition to motion re [33] Motion to Dismiss/Lack of Jurisdiction filed by DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET, DONALD J. TRUMP. (Holt, Samuel)