112345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728The Parties have reached agreement on a settlement in this case.
Under the terms of the Agreement, Defendants agree not toreinstitute or otherwise conduct video conferencing of parole hearings for inmateswho are incarcerated within the jurisdiction of the United States Court of Appealsfor the Ninth Circuit, absent a) a material change in the applicable language of 18U.S.C. § 4208(e), or b) a decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals or theUnited States Supreme Court holding that 18 U.S.C. § 4208(e) permits the ParoleCommission to conduct parole hearings by video conference. In light of thatAgreement, Plaintiffs agree to dismiss this case with prejudice.IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties to this actionthrough their designated counsel that the above-captioned action be and hereby isdismissed with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2),subject to the Court retaining exclusive and continuing jurisdiction to enforce theAgreement attached as Exhibit A.Dated: September 30, 2013 Respectfully submitted,By: /s/ Jessica PriceJessica PriceACLU of Southern CaliforniaAttorney for PlaintiffsANDRE BIROTTE JR.United States AttorneyLEON W. WEIDMANAssistant United States AttorneyChief, Civil DivisionBy: /s/ Robert I. Lester Robert I. Lester Assistant United States AttorneyAttorney for Defendants
Case 2:12-cv-00700-DSF-RZ Document 33 Filed 09/30/13 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:337