• Embed Doc
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
UNITED STATES’ RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS’ MEMORANDUM OF POINTSAND AUTHORITIES IN RESPONSE TO COURT’S MAY 17, 2006 ORDER, Case No. C 06-0672-VRW
PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General, Civil DivisionCARL J. NICHOLSDeputy Assistant Attorney GeneralDOUGLAS N. LETTER Terrorism Litigation CounselJOSEPH H. HUNTDirector, Federal Programs BranchANTHONY J. COPPOLINOSpecial Litigation Counseltony.coppolino@usdoj.gov 
 
RENÉE S. ORLEANSrenee.orleans@usdoj.govANDREW H. TANNENBAUMandrew.tannenbaum@usdoj.gov Trial AttorneysU.S. Department of JusticeCivil Division, Federal Programs Branch20 Massachusetts Avenue, NWWashington, D.C. 20001Phone: (202) 514-4782/(202) 514-4263Fax: (202) 616-8460/(202) 616-8202/(202) 318-2461Attorneys for Intervenor Defendant United States of AmericaUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA)TASH HEPTING, GREGORY HICKS)CAROLYN JEWEL and ERIK KNUTZEN )on Behalf of Themselves and All Others)Similarly Situated,))Case No. C-06-0672-VRWPlaintiffs,))
UNITED STATES’ RESPONSE
v.)
TO PLAINTIFFS’ MEMORANDUM
)
OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
AT&T CORP., AT&T INC. and )
IN RESPONSE TO COURT’S MAY 17,
DOES 1-20, inclusive,)
2006 MINUTE ORDER 
)Defendants.)) ____________________________________)
Case 3:06-cv-00672-VRW Document 145 Filed 05/24/2006 Page 1 of 29
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
UNITED STATES’ RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS’ MEMORANDUM OF POINTSAND AUTHORITIES IN RESPONSE TO COURT’S MAY 17, 2006 ORDER, Case No. C 06-0672-VRW
-ii-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION.............................................................1ARGUMENT.................................................................2I.
 IN CAMERA, EX PARTE 
REVIEW OF THE UNITED STATES’ SUBMISSIONSDOES NOT VIOLATE DUE PROCESS......................................2II.PLAINTIFFS ARE NOT ENTITLED TO ACCESS TO THE CLASSIFIEDMATERIALS SUBMITTED
 IN CAMERA, EX PARTE 
..........................8III.PLAINTIFFS HAVE OFFERED NO VALID REASON FOR THE COURT TOFOREGO REVIEW OF THE
 IN CAMERA, EX PARTE 
MATERIALS.............13CONCLUSION..............................................................20CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Case 3:06-cv-00672-VRW Document 145 Filed 05/24/2006 Page 2 of 29
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
UNITED STATES’ RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS’ MEMORANDUM OF POINTSAND AUTHORITIES IN RESPONSE TO COURT’S MAY 17, 2006 ORDER, Case No. C 06-0672-VRW
-iii-
TABLE OF AUTHORITIESCASES
 American-Arab Anti-Discrim. Comm. v. Reno
,70 F.3d 1045 (9th Cir. 1995)..............................................5
 Armstrong v. Bush
,924 F.2d 282 (D.C. Cir. 1991)............................................13
Central Intelligence Agency v. Sims
,471 U.S. 159 (1985).....................................................5
City of Los Angeles v. Lyons
,461 U.S. 95 (1983).....................................................14
 DTM Research, L.L.C. v. AT&T Corp.
,245 F.3d 327 (4th Cir. 2001).............................................10
 Dept. of Navy v. Egan
,484 U.S. 518 (1988)................................................5, 9, 13
 Doe v. Browner 
,902 F. Supp. 1240 (D. Nev. 1995)..........................................4
 Dorfmont v. Brown
,913 F.2d 1399 (9th Cir. 1990).............................................9
 Edmonds v. U.S. Dept. of Justice
,323 F. Supp. 2d 65 (D.D.C. 2004),
aff'd 
, 161 Fed. Appx. 6 (D.C. Cir.),
cert. denied 
, 126 S. Ct. 734 (2005)......................................4, 19
 El Masri v. Tenet 
,Civil Action No. 05-1417 (E.D. Va.)....................................passim
 Ellsberg v. Mitchell 
,709 F.2d 51 (D.C. Cir. 1983)..........................................17, 20
 Fitzgerald v. Penthouse Int'l, Ltd.
,776 F.2d 1236 (4th Cir. 1985).........................................14, 16
Gilbert v. Homar 
,520 U.S. 924 (1997).....................................................6
Global Relief Found. v. O'Neill 
,315 F.3d 748 (7th Cir. 2002),
cert. denied 
, 540 U.S. 1003 (2003).................4
 In re Grand Jury Proceedings
,867 F.2d 539 (9th Cir. 1988)..............................................3
Case 3:06-cv-00672-VRW Document 145 Filed 05/24/2006 Page 3 of 29
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...