Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Joint Status Report - Allen v DHS - Draft 3-10-10

Joint Status Report - Allen v DHS - Draft 3-10-10

Ratings: (0)|Views: 374 |Likes:
Published by PhilGA

More info:

Published by: PhilGA on Mar 11, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





TONY WESTAssistant Attorney GeneralELIZABETH J. SHAPIRODeputy Branch Director BRIGHAM J. BOWEN (DC Bar No. 981555)Trial AttorneyUnited States Department of JusticeCivil Division, Federal Programs BranchPost Office Box 883Washington, D.C. 20044Tel: (202) 514-6289Fax: (202) 307-0449 brigham.bowen@usdoj.govUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTDISTRICT OF ARIZONAKENNETH ALLEN,Plaintiff,v.DEPARTMENT OF HOMELANDSECURITY and U.S. DEPARTMENT OFSTATE,
et al.
In accordance with the Court’s February 8, 2010 Order, the parties hereby submit astatus report regarding this action.1. NATURE OF THE CASEThis case is a Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) action, by which Plaintiff seeksdocuments alleged to be in the custody of the Department of State and the Citizenship andImmigration Service (“USCIS”). Alleged documents at issue include private passport,travel, and other records relating to President Barack Obama (and/or to “Barry Soetoro”), hismother, Stanley Ann Dunham, and his mother’s former husband, Lolo Soetoro.2. FACTUAL AND LEGAL ISSUES IN DISPUTEBy Order dated January 29, 2010 [Dkt. #27], the Court has dismissed all claimsregarding alleged documents concerning President Obama (and/or to “Barry Soetoro”). The
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728remaining claims concern requests for documents concerning Dunham and Lolo Soetoro. Asto these documents, the parties anticipate that once the defendant agencies have completed processing of these requests, the claims either will be voluntarily dismissed by Plaintiff or addressed via summary judgment briefing.3. JURISDICTIONAL BASISThis court has jurisdiction pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B).4. PARTIES WHO HAVE NOT BEEN SERVED OR MADE AN APPEARANCEAll remaining parties have been served (prior putative parties John Does 1-49 have been dismissed by the Court).5. PARTIES NOT SUBJECT TO THE COURT’S JURISDICTION None.6. DISPOSITIVE OR PARTIALLY DISPOSITIVE MOTIONSThe parties anticipate filing motions for summary judgment.7. REFERENCE TO ARBITRATION, TO A MASTER, OR TO A MAGISTRATE ATTRIALAt this time, the parties do not believe that this case is suitable for reference toarbitration, to a master, or a magistrate for trial.8. RELATED CASESThere are no pending related cases.9. INITIAL DISCLOSUREBecause discovery is generally not available in FOIA actions, the parties suggest thatinitial disclosures are not warranted in this matter. However the Plaintiff reserves a right to seek further discovery. At this time thePlaintiff is at a disadvantage not having enough information to form an opinion. If thedocuments released provided the information responsive to Plaintiff's FOIA's there would beno further need for discovery.10. SUGGESTED LIMITATIONS ON DISCOVERY
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728The parties suggest that discovery should not take place in this matter. Plaintiff would like to reserve that decision until the defendants have released all thedocuments they intend to.11. PROPOSED DEADLINESDefendants anticipate that the searches will be complete on or before [June 30, 2010].Accordingly, the parties suggest the following proposed deadlines for summary judgment briefing:Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment: August 5, 2010Plaintiffs Opposition:August 26, 2010DefendantsReplySeptember 9, 201012. ESTIMATED DATE AND LENGTH OF TRIAL None.13. JURY TRIAL REQUEST None.14. PROSPECTS FOR SETTLEMENTAs to the Dunham and Lolo Soetoro records, the parties anticipate that settlement may be possible after processing has completed and Plaintiff has reviewed the documentsreleased, if any. The parties do not anticipate settling disputes concerning President Obama(and/or “Barry Soetoro”).15. UNUSUAL OR COMPLEX PROBLEMSThis case does not involve any unusual or complex issues.16. ADDITIONAL MATTERS None.If at a later date uncertain Plaintiff feels that a deposition would be helpful fromMaya Soetoro, the Plaintiff would reserve that right. Chances are that won't happen, butPlaintiffs doesn't have enough information to form an opinion as to that matter.

Activity (2)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->