U.S. District Court Southern District of New York (Foley Square) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP

Clark et al v. City of New York Assigned to: Judge Analisa Torres Referred to: Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker Related Cases: 1:20-cv-10259-AT-KHP
1:18-cv-10566-AT-KHP 1:20-cv-00263-AT-KHP Cause: 42:2000cc Religious Land Use & Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000

Date Filed: 03/16/2018 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Plaintiff
Jamilla Clark on Behalf of Herself and Others Similarly Situated

represented by Albert Fox Cahn Surveillance Technology Oversight Project C/O Urban Justice Center 40 Rector Street Ste 9th Floor New York, NY 10006 646-602-5600 Email: albert@stopspying.org ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Emma Lerner Freeman Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP 600 Fifth Avenue 10th Floor New York, NY 10020 212-763-5000 Fax: 212-763-5001 Email: efreeman@ecbalaw.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Matthew D. Brinckerhoff Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP 600 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10020 212-763-5000 Fax: 212-763-5001 Email:

Plaintiff Arwa Aziz on Behalf of Herself and Others Similarly Situated
Plaintiff Turning Point for Women and Families

mbrinckerhoff@ecbawm.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ogilvie Andrew Fraser Wilson Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP 600 Fifth Avenue at Rockefeller Plaza 10th Floor New York, NY 10020 212-763-5000 Email: awilson@ecbawm.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Albert Fox Cahn (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Emma Lerner Freeman (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Matthew D. Brinckerhoff (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ogilvie Andrew Fraser Wilson (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Albert Fox Cahn (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Emma Lerner Freeman (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Matthew D. Brinckerhoff (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ogilvie Andrew Fraser Wilson

V. Defendant City of New York

(See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Carolyn Kay Depoian New York City Law Department 100 Church Street Rm. 2-303B New York, NY 10007 (212) 442-1048 Fax: (212) 788-9776 Email: cdepoian@law.nyc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Rachel Amy Seligman New York City Law Department 100 Church Street Room 6-188 New York, NY 10007 (212) 788-0784 Fax: (212) 788-9776 Email: rseligma@law.nyc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Suzanna Publicker Mettham NYC Law Department 100 Church Street Room 3-212 New York, NY 10007 212-356-2356 Fax: 212-356-3509 Email: smettham@law.nyc.gov TERMINATED: 11/30/2018 LEAD ATTORNEY
Bilal Husain Haider New York City Law Department 100 Church Street New York, NY 10007 212-356-3549 Email: bhaider@law.nyc.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

James Monroe Dervin New York City Law Department 100 Church Street New York, NY 10007 (212)-356-0873 Fax: (212)-356-1148 Email: jdervin@law.nyc.gov TERMINATED: 05/09/2018
Samantha Rena Millar Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP 800 3rd Avenue 13th Floor New York, NY 10022 212-471-6245 Email: smillar@law.nyc.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 03/16/2018
03/16/2018 03/16/2018
03/16/2018 03/16/2018 03/19/2018

#

Docket Text

COMPLAINT against CITY OF NEW YORK. (Filing Fee $

1

400.00, Receipt Number 0208-14819179)Document filed by

Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families, Arwa

Aziz.(Wilson, Ogilvie) (Entered: 03/16/2018)

2 FILING ERROR - PDF ERROR - CIVIL COVER SHEET filed. (Wilson, Ogilvie) Modified on 3/19/2018 (jgo). (Entered: 03/16/2018)

3 REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to City of New

York, re: 1 Complaint. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families. (Wilson, Ogilvie) (Entered: 03/16/2018)

4 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Emma Lerner Freeman on behalf of Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families. (Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 03/16/2018)

5 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Albert Fox Cahn on behalf of Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families. (Cahn, Albert) (Entered: 03/16/2018)

***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING DEFICIENT CIVIL COVER SHEET. Notice to attorney Ogilvie Andrew

03/19/2018
03/19/2018
03/19/2018
03/19/2018 03/19/2018 03/19/2018 03/27/2018

Fraser Wilson to RE-FILE Document No. 2 Civil Cover Sheet. The filing is deficient for the following reason(s): Origin Code 2a must only be selected when Origin Code 2 is selected;. Refile the document using the event type Civil Cover Sheet found under the event list Other Documents and attach the correct PDF. Use civil cover sheet issued by S.D.N.Y. dated June 2017. The S.D.N.Y. Civil Cover Sheet dated June 2017 is located at http://nysd.uscourts.gov/file/forms/civil-cover-sheet.. (jgo) (Entered: 03/19/2018)
***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING PARTY MODIFICATION. Notice to attorney Ogilvie Andrew Fraser Wilson. The party information for the following party/parties has been modified: City of New York. The information for the party/parties has been modified for the following reason/reasons: party name was entered in all caps;. (jgo) (Entered: 03/19/2018)
CASE OPENING INITIAL ASSIGNMENT NOTICE: The aboveentitled action is assigned to Judge Robert W. Sweet. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned District Judge, located at http://nysd.uscourts.gov/judges/District. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. Please download and review the ECF Rules and Instructions, located at http://nysd.uscourts.gov/ecf_filing.php. (jgo) (Entered: 03/19/2018)
Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker is so designated. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1) parties are notified that they may consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties who wish to consent may access the necessary form at the following link: http://nysd.uscourts.gov/forms.php. (jgo) (Entered: 03/19/2018)
Case Designated ECF. (jgo) (Entered: 03/19/2018)
6 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed. (Wilson, Ogilvie) (Entered: 03/19/2018)
7 ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED as to City of New York. (jgo) (Entered: 03/19/2018)
8 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE of Summons and Complaint. City of New York served on 3/20/2018, answer due 4/10/2018. Service was accepted by Betty Mazcyk, Person Authorized to Accept

04/09/2018 04/09/2018 04/10/2018 04/10/2018 05/04/2018
05/07/2018
05/07/2018
05/07/2018

Service. Document filed by Jamilla Clark; Turning Point for Women and Families; Arwa Aziz. (Wilson, Ogilvie) (Entered: 03/27/2018)
9 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by James Monroe Dervin on behalf of City of New York. (Dervin, James) (Entered: 04/09/2018)
10 LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to file an answer or otherwise respond to the complaint addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from James M. Dervin dated April 9, 2018. Document filed by City of New York.(Dervin, James) (Entered: 04/09/2018)
11 ORDER granting 10 Letter Motion for Extension of Time. So Ordered. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 4/10/2018) cc: Albert F. Cahn, Esq. Weil Gotshal & Manges, LLP (js) (Entered: 04/10/2018)
Set/Reset Deadlines: City of New York answer due 5/9/2018. (js) (Entered: 04/10/2018)
12 SECOND LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to File
Response/Reply as to 1 Complaint addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from Suzanna Publicker Mettham dated May 4, 2018. Document filed by City of New York.(Mettham, Suzanna) (Entered: 05/04/2018)
13 LETTER RESPONSE to Motion addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from O. Andrew F. Wilson dated May 7, 2018 re: 12 SECOND LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to File
Response/Reply as to 1 Complaint addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from Suzanna Publicker Mettham dated May 4, 2018. . Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families. (Wilson, Ogilvie) (Entered: 05/07/2018)
15 NOTICE of Substitution of Attorney. Old Attorney: James Monroe Dervin, New Attorney: Suzanna Publicker Mettham, Address: NYC Law Department, 100 Church Street, Rm. 3-212, New York, NY, United States 10007, 2123562356. Document filed by City of New York. (Mettham, Suzanna) (Entered: 05/07/2018)
***DELETED DOCUMENT. Deleted document number 14 Pretrial Order. The document was incorrectly filed in this case. (js) (Entered: 05/16/2018)

05/07/2018 05/08/2018 05/09/2018 05/09/2018
06/13/2018 06/13/2018
06/13/2018 06/14/2018

19 PRETRIAL ORDER: Initial Conference set for 8/7/2018 at 12:00 PM in Courtroom 18C, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Robert W. Sweet. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 5/7/2018) (js) (Entered: 05/16/2018)
16 NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS by Albert Fox Cahn on behalf of All Plaintiffs. New Address: CAIR-NY, 46-01 20th Avenue, Queens, New York, United States 11105, 646-665-7599. (Cahn, Albert) (Entered: 05/08/2018)
17 MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: 15 Notice of Substitution of Attorney, filed by City of New York. ENDORSEMENT: So ordered. (Attorney James Monroe Dervin terminated.) (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 5/8/2018) (anc) (Entered: 05/09/2018)
18 ORDER: granting 12 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. Given the apparent significance of the complaint, the thirty day extension of time to answer or move is granted. No further extensions will be granted without good cause having been shown. So ordered. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 5/8/2018) (ap) (Entered: 05/09/2018)
20 FIRST MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Document filed by City of New York. Responses due by 6/27/2018 Return Date set for 8/7/2018 at 12:00 PM.(Mettham, Suzanna) (Entered: 06/13/2018)
21 DECLARATION of Suzanna Publicker Mettham in Support re: 20 FIRST MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).. Document filed by City of New York. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Complaint, # 2 Exhibit B - Aziz Notice of Claim, # 3 Exhibit C - Turning Point Website)(Mettham, Suzanna) (Entered: 06/13/2018)
22 MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 20 FIRST MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). . Document filed by City of New York. (Mettham, Suzanna) (Entered: 06/13/2018)
23 ORDER. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, dated June 14, 2018, shall be heard at 12:00PM on Wednesday, August 8, 2018, in Courtroom 18C, United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street. All papers shall be served in accordance with Local Civil Rule 6.1. It is so ordered. (Oral Argument set for 8/8/2018 at 12:00 PM in Courtroom 18C, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Robert W. Sweet.) (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 6/14/2018) (rjm) (Entered: 06/15/2018)

06/15/2018
06/18/2018
06/18/2018 07/16/2018 07/18/2018

24 AMENDED ORDER: Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, dated June 14, 2018, shall be heard at 12:00PM on Wednesday, August 15, 2018, in Courtroom 18C, United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street. All papers shall be served in accordance with Local Civil Rule 6.1. Set Deadlines/Hearing as to 20 FIRST MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6): (Motion Hearing set for 8/15/2018 at 12:00 PM in Courtroom 18C, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Robert W. Sweet.) (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 6/15/2018) (tro) (Entered: 06/15/2018)
25 STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING EXTENSION OF BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR MOTION TO DISMISS: NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the undersigned, that: 1. Plaintiffs' time to file papers in opposition to the motion to dismiss shall be extended to July 27, 2018. 2. Defendant's time to file reply papers in further support of the motion to dismiss shall be extended to August l0, 2018. So ordered. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 6/18/2018) (ne) Modified on 8/30/2018 (ne). (Entered: 06/19/2018)
Set/Reset Deadlines: Responses due by 7/27/2018 Replies due by 8/10/2018. (ne) (Entered: 06/19/2018)
26 FIRST LETTER MOTION to Stay Pending Resolution of Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from Suzanna Publicker Mettham dated July 16, 2018. Document filed by City of New York.(Mettham, Suzanna) (Entered: 07/16/2018)
27 AMENDED ORDER: Defendant's motion to stay discovery, dated July 16, 2018, shall be heard concurrently with its motion to dismiss, at 12:00PM on Wednesday, August 15, 2018, in Courtroom 18C, United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street. All papers shall be served in accordance with Local Civil Rule 6.1. IT IS SO ORDERED., Set Deadlines/Hearing as to 20 FIRST MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6)., 26 FIRST LETTER MOTION to Stay Pending Resolution of Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from Suzanna Publicker Mettham dated July 16, 2018. :( Motion Hearing set for 8/15/2018 at 12:00 PM in Courtroom 18C, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Robert W. Sweet.) (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 7/18/2018) (ama) Modified on 7/18/2018 (ama). (Entered: 07/18/2018)

07/20/2018 07/23/2018
07/24/2018 07/27/2018 07/27/2018 08/10/2018 08/10/2018 08/21/2018

28 JOINT LETTER MOTION for Conference re: 27 Order,,,, Set Motion and R&R Deadlines/Hearings,,, Requesting Initial Conference to be Adjourned to August 15, 2018 addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from Emma Freeman dated July 20, 2018. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families.(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 07/20/2018)

29 LETTER RESPONSE in Opposition to Motion addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from Emma L. Freeman dated July 23, 2018 re: 26 FIRST LETTER MOTION to Stay Pending Resolution of Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from Suzanna Publicker Mettham dated July 16, 2018. . Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families. (Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 07/23/2018)

30 ORDER granting 28 Letter Motion for Conference. So ordered. Initial Conference set for 8/15/2018 at 12:00 PM before Judge Robert W. Sweet. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 7/23/2018) (cf) (Entered: 07/24/2018)

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Opposition re: 20 FIRST

31

MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and

12(b)(6). . Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning

Point for Women and Families. (Freeman, Emma) (Entered:

07/27/2018)

32 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Bilal Husain Haider on behalf of City of New York. (Haider, Bilal) (Entered: 07/27/2018)

33 DECLARATION of Suzanna Publicker Mettham in Support re: 20 FIRST MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).. Document filed by City of New York. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit D - Clark Certificate of Disposition, # 2 Exhibit E - Aziz Certificate of Disposition)(Mettham, Suzanna) (Entered: 08/10/2018)

34 REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 20 FIRST MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). . Document filed by City of New York. (Mettham, Suzanna) (Entered: 08/10/2018)

35 TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings re: CONFERENCE held on 8/15/2018 before Judge Robert W. Sweet. Court Reporter/Transcriber: Anita Trombetta, (212) 805-0300. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of

08/21/2018
08/30/2018 08/30/2018 08/30/2018 09/04/2018

Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Redaction Request due 9/11/2018. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 9/21/2018. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 11/19/2018.(McGuirk, Kelly) (Entered: 08/21/2018)
36 NOTICE OF FILING OF OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT Notice is hereby given that an official transcript of a CONFERENCE proceeding held on 8/15/18 has been filed by the court reporter/transcriber in the above-captioned matter. The parties have seven (7) calendar 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...(McGuirk, Kelly) (Entered: 08/21/2018)
37 JOINT LETTER MOTION for Discovery and Proposed Unsealing Order addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from Emma Freeman dated August 30, 2018. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Unsealing Order)(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 08/30/2018)
38 PROPOSED ORDER. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families. (Freeman, Emma) Proposed Order to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff. (Entered: 08/30/2018)
***NOTICE TO COURT REGARDING PROPOSED ORDER. Document No. 38 Proposed Order was reviewed and approved as to form. (km) (Entered: 08/30/2018)
39 UNSEALING ORDER granting 37 Letter Motion for Discovery. NOW, THEREFORE, WITH THE AGREEMENT OF ALL PARTIES, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the statutory sealing requirements of New York Criminal Procedure Law §§ 160.50, 160.55, 160.58, 720.15, and/or 720.35 shall be held not to apply for the limited purpose of allowing the New York City Police Department to be permitted to search for and provide arrest records regarding all individuals who were (1) arrested by or in the custody of the NYPD; (2) required to take a post-arrest Booking Photograph while in any NYPD facility; and (3) required to remove any religious head covering for that Booking Photograph to Corporation Counsel of the City of New York for use in the above-captioned case only; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT shall provide to the Corporation Counsel of the City of New York the following

09/07/2018
09/10/2018 09/10/2018 09/14/2018 09/17/2018
10/05/2018 10/17/2018

information, if retained by the New York City Police Department: their most recent addresses. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT ZACHARY W. CARTER, Corporation Counsel of the City of New York, or his authorized representative, may transmit any records or identifying information pertaining to members of the putative Settlement Class contained in the sealed records (including their first and last names, dates of birth, arrest numbers, NYSID numbers, and most recent addresses) to class counsel in the above-captioned case. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the use of the sealed records is restricted to use in the above-captioned action for the limited purpose defined above and in accordance with a Stipulation and Order of Confidentiality to be filed before the records and information discussed herein are transmitted. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 9/4/2018) (ne) Transmission to Sealed Records Clerk for processing. (Entered: 09/04/2018)
40 LETTER MOTION to Stay addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from Suzanna Publicker Mettham dated September 7, 2018. Document filed by City of New York.(Mettham, Suzanna) (Entered: 09/07/2018)
41 ORDER granting 40 Letter Motion to Stay. So ordered. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 9/7/2018) (anc) (Entered: 09/10/2018)
Case Stayed. (anc) (Entered: 09/10/2018)
42 PROPOSED PROTECTIVE ORDER. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families. (Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 09/14/2018)
43 STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION regarding procedures to be followed that shall govern the handling of confidential material. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 9/14/2018) (jwh) (Entered: 09/17/2018)
44 STATUS REPORT. Regarding Settlement and Request for Leave to File Additional Motion Points Document filed by City of New York.(Mettham, Suzanna) (Entered: 10/05/2018)
45 MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: 44 Status Report filed by City of New York. ENDORSEMENT: the motion will be heard on October 31 at noon or on each of the Wednesday agreed upon by counsel. So Ordered. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 10/16/2018) (js) (Entered: 10/17/2018)

10/19/2018 10/29/2018
11/27/2018 11/28/2018 11/28/2018 11/28/2018 11/30/2018
12/11/2018 12/11/2018

46 STATUS REPORT. Regarding Request for Leave to File Opposition to Supplemental Standing Points Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families.(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 10/19/2018)
47 MEMO ENDORSEMENT: on re: 46 Status Report filed by Arwa Aziz, Turning Point for Women and Families, Jamilla Clark. ENDORSEMENT: So Ordered. (Oral Argument set for 11/28/2018 at 12:00 PM before Judge Robert W. Sweet.) (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 10/26/2018) (js) (Entered: 10/29/2018)
48 LETTER MOTION to Adjourn Conference /Oral argument on November 28, 2018 addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from Rachel Seligman Weiss dated November 27, 2018. Document filed by City of New York.(Seligman, Rachel) (Entered: 11/27/2018)
49 MOTION for Suzanna Publicker Mettham to Withdraw as Attorney . Document filed by City of New York.(Mettham, Suzanna) (Entered: 11/28/2018)
50 DECLARATION of Suzanna Publicker Mettham in Support re: 49 MOTION for Suzanna Publicker Mettham to Withdraw as Attorney .. Document filed by City of New York. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Mettham, Suzanna) (Entered: 11/28/2018)
51 ORDER granting 48 Letter Motion to Adjourn Conference. So Ordered. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 11/28/2018) (js) (Entered: 11/28/2018)
52 NOTICE OF MOTION OF SUZANNA PUBLICKER METTHAM TO WITHDRAW AS ATTORNEY granting 49 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. SO ORDERED. Attorney Suzanna Publicker Mettham terminated. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 11/29/2018) (jca) (Entered: 11/30/2018)
53 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Samantha Rena Millar on behalf of City of New York. (Millar, Samantha) (Entered: 12/11/2018)
54 LETTER MOTION to Adjourn Conference /Oral Argument on December 12, 2018 addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from Rachel Seligman Weiss dated December 11, 2018. Document filed by City of New York.(Seligman, Rachel) (Entered: 12/11/2018)

12/11/2018
12/13/2018 01/07/2019 01/10/2019
01/29/2019 01/31/2019 02/01/2019 02/01/2019 02/20/2019

55 LETTER RESPONSE in Opposition to Motion addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from Emma L. Freeman dated December 11, 2018 re: 54 LETTER MOTION to Adjourn Conference /Oral Argument on December 12, 2018 addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from Rachel Seligman Weiss dated December 11, 2018. . Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families. (Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 12/11/2018)

56 ORDER granting 54 Letter Motion to Adjourn Conference. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 12/12/2018) (jca) (Entered: 12/13/2018)

LETTER MOTION for Discovery to Proceed addressed to Judge

57

Robert W. Sweet from Emma Freeman dated January 7, 2019.

Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for

Women and Families.(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 01/07/2019)

58 LETTER RESPONSE to Motion addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from Bilal Haider dated January 10, 2019 re: 57

LETTER MOTION for Discovery to Proceed addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from Emma Freeman dated January 7, 2019. . Document filed by City of New York. (Haider, Bilal) (Entered: 01/10/2019)

59 JOINT LETTER MOTION for Discovery Proposed Discovery Plan addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from Emma L. Freeman dated January 29, 2019. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families.(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 01/29/2019)

60 NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS by Albert Fox Cahn on behalf of All Plaintiffs. New Address: Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, 80 Dekalb Avenue, #15C, Brooklyn, NY, USA 11201, 571-766-6273. (Cahn, Albert) (Entered: 01/31/2019)

61 ORDER granting 59 Letter Motion for Discovery. So Ordered. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 1/30/2019) (js) (Entered: 02/01/2019)

Set/Reset Deadlines: Discovery due by 9/13/2019. Fact Discovery due by 7/31/2019. Motions due by 10/31/2019. (js) (Entered: 02/01/2019)

62 LETTER MOTION to Adjourn Conference /Oral Argument scheduled for 2/27/19 addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from

02/22/2019 02/25/2019 02/25/2019 03/20/2019 03/27/2019
03/28/2019

Bilal Haider. Document filed by City of New York.(Haider, Bilal) (Entered: 02/20/2019)
63 ORDER granting 62 Letter Motion to Adjourn Conference. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 2/21/2019) (ks) (Entered: 02/22/2019)
64 MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: 62 LETTER MOTION to Adjourn Conference /Oral Argument scheduled for 2/27/19 addressed to Judge Robert W. Sweet from Bilal Haider. filed by City of New York. ENDORSEMENT: Motion adjourned to April 3, 2019. So Ordered. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 2/25/2019) (ks) (Entered: 02/26/2019)
Set/Reset Deadlines as to Motion Hearing set for 4/3/2019 at 12:00 PM before Judge Robert W. Sweet. (ks) (Entered: 02/27/2019)
65 NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS by Albert Fox Cahn on behalf of All Plaintiffs. New Address: Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, 40 Rector Street, 9th Floor, New York, NY, US 10006, 646-665-7599 ext. 503. (Cahn, Albert) (Entered: 03/20/2019)
66 DIRECTION TO THE BAR AND INTERIM ORDER OF REFERENCE: The Hon. Robert W. Sweet of this court having died on March 24, 2019; and Time being needed in order to effect the reassignment of the cases on his docket: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT, pending the reassignment of Judge Sweet's civil cases, all urgent matters should be taken either to the Magistrate Judge who is assigned to the case or to the District Judge sitting in Part I. In cases in which Judge Sweet did not sign an order of reference, this order operates as an interim order of reference to the Magistrate Judge for interim pre-trial supervision. Routine case management requests (such as, for extension of time) should be directed to the Magistrate Judge, not to the Part I Judge. Referred to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker. (Signed by Judge Colleen McMahon on 3/27/2019) (cf) (Entered: 03/28/2019)
67 ORDER SCHEDULING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, A case management conference in this matter is hereby scheduled for May 7, 2019 at 4:00 p.m. in Courtroom 17D, United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York. SO ORDERED. (Case Management Conference set for 5/7/2019 at 04:00 PM in Courtroom 17D, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 3/28/19) (yv) (Entered: 03/28/2019)

04/01/2019 04/01/2019
04/02/2019 04/04/2019 04/09/2019 04/09/2019 04/15/2019

68 JOINT LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker from Emma L. Freeman dated April 1, 2019 re: Joint Request for Adjournment of Oral Argument. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families.(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 04/01/2019)

69 MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: 68 Letter Request for Adjournment of Oral Argument, filed by Arwa Aziz, Turning Point for Women and Families, Jamilla Clark. ENDORSEMENT: APPLICATION GRANTED: The Oral Argument on Defendant's motion to dismiss - presently scheduled for April 3, 2019 (ECF #64) will now be addressed at the Case Management Conference scheduled for Tuesday, May 7, 2019 at 4:00 p.m. in courtroom 17D, United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York. Application Granted. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 4/1/19) (yv) (Entered: 04/01/2019)

70 ORDER: The parties are requested to confer regarding consent to the jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge for all purposes. To the extent the parties agree to proceed before a Magistrate Judge for all purposes pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), they should complete a Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge form, a copy of which is attached to this Order, as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 3/28/2019) (jwh) (Entered: 04/02/2019)

71 JOINT LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker from Emma L. Freeman dated April 4, 2019 re: Letter Regarding Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families.(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 04/04/2019)

NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT to Judge Analisa Torres. Judge Robert W. Sweet is no longer assigned to the case. (sjo) (Entered: 04/09/2019)

72 ORDER: It is hereby ORDERED that by April 16, 2019, the parties shall file a joint letter advising the Court of the history, posture, and status of the case. The letter shall explain the status of all outstanding motions and shall explain any motions the parties currently foresee filing in the future. The letter shall contain citations to the docket and shall not exceed five single-spaced pages in length. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 4/9/2019) (ks) (Entered: 04/09/2019)

JOINT LETTER addressed to Judge Analisa Torres from Emma L.

73

Freeman dated April 15, 2019 re: Letter Regarding Case Status.

04/15/2019 04/25/2019 04/29/2019 05/16/2019 05/16/2019

Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families.(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 04/15/2019)
74 MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: 73 Letter filed by Arwa Aziz, Turning Point for Women and Families, Jamilla Clark. ENDORSEMENT: Having reviewed the parties' joint letter, it is hereby ORDERED that by May 16, 2019, the parties shall filea joint status report regarding settlement. If the parties have not reached a settlement in principle by that time, the Court will direct the patties to submit a proposed case management plan in accordance with its Individual Practices in Civil Cases. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 4/15/2019) (cf) (Entered: 04/15/2019)
75 JOINT LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker from Emma L. Freeman dated April 25, 2019 re: REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT OF CONFERENCE ON MAY 7, 2019. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families.(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 04/25/2019)
76 MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: 75 Letter adjourning conference, filed by Arwa Aziz, Turning Point for Women and Families, Jamilla Clark. ENDORSEMENT: The Court hereby adjourns the conference scheduled May 7, 2019 until Monday, July 8, 2019 at 10:30 a.m. The parties are directed to file a joint letter, updating the Court as to the status of discovery and settlement no later than May 23, 2019. So Ordered., (Case Management Conference set for 7/8/2019 at 10:30 AM before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 4/29/19) (yv) (Entered: 04/29/2019)
77 JOINT LETTER addressed to Judge Analisa Torres from Emma Freeman dated May 16, 2019 re: JOINT LETTER REGARDING SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit EXHIBIT A: CIVIL CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN COMPLETED BY PARTIES)(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 05/16/2019)
78 CIVIL CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN AND SCHEDULING ORDER: All Parties do not consent to conducting all further proceedings before a magistrate judge, including motions and trial. 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). This case is not to be tried to a jury. All fact discovery shall be completed no later than September 13, 2019. Depositions to be completed by August 30, 2019. All expert

05/16/2019 05/23/2019 06/19/2019
07/03/2019 07/04/2019 08/13/2019

discovery shall be completed no later than October 31, 2019. Counsel for the parties have conferred and their present best estimate of the length of trial is: 7 days. The next Case Management Conference is scheduled for 10/2/19 at 11:20 a.m. (As further set forth in this Order.) Deposition due by 8/30/2019. Fact Discovery due by 9/13/2019. Expert Discovery due by 10/31/2019. Case Management Conference set for 10/2/2019 at 11:20 AM before Judge Analisa Torres. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 5/16/2019) (cf) (Entered: 05/17/2019)
79 MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: 77 Letter, filed by Arwa Aziz, Turning Point for Women and Families, Jamilla Clark. ENDORSEMENT: The parties' request for oral argument on Defendant's motion to dismiss is DENIED. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 5/16/2019) (cf) (Entered: 05/17/2019)
80 JOINT LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker from Emma Freeman dated May 23, 2019 re: LETTER REGARDING SETTLEMENT AND DISCOVERY UPDATE. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families.(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 05/23/2019)
81 ORDER denying as moot 57 Letter Motion for Discovery; denying as moot 26 Letter Motion to Stay. The Court has already entered a Civil Case Management Plan and Scheduling Order for this case, ECF No. 78, and shall not stay discovery pending a decision on any motions. (HEREBY ORDERED by Judge Analisa Torres)(Text Only Order) (Pasculli, Victoria) (Entered: 06/19/2019)
82 LETTER MOTION to Adjourn Conference scheduled for July 8, 2019 at 10:30 a.m. addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker from Samantha R. Millar dated July 3, 2019. Document filed by City of New York.(Millar, Samantha) (Entered: 07/03/2019)
83 ORDER granting 82 Letter Motion to Adjourn Conference (HEREBY ORDERED by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker)(Text Only Order) (Parker, Katharine) (Entered: 07/04/2019)
84 JOINT LETTER addressed to Judge Analisa Torres from Emma L. Freeman dated August 13,2019 re: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF DISCOVERY DEADLINES. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families.(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 08/13/2019)

08/14/2019
09/10/2019 09/12/2019 09/26/2019

85 MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: 84 Letter filed by Arwa Aziz, Turning Point for Women and Families, Jamilla Clark. ENDORSEMENT: This action has been assigned to the undersigned for general pre-trial. (Doc. No. 66.) Fact discovery is hereby extended to November 26, 2019, expert discovery is extended to January 14, 2020, and dispositive motions are due by December 10, 2019. So long as the parties agree, interim deadlines may be changed without leave of Court. A status conference is hereby scheduled for December 9, 2019 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 17-D, United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 8/14/2019) ( Deposition due by 12/10/2019., Expert Discovery due by 1/14/2020., Fact Discovery due by 11/26/2019., Status Conference set for 12/9/2019 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 17D, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker.)(ks) (Entered: 08/14/2019)
86 JOINT LETTER addressed to Judge Analisa Torres from Emma L. Freeman dated September 10, 2019 re: REGARDING DISCOVERY DISPUTE. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families.(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 09/10/2019)
87 MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: 86 Letter filed by Arwa Aziz, Turning Point for Women and Families, Jamilla Clark. MEMO ENDORSEMENT: As a reminder to the parties, this action has been referred to the undersigned for pre-trial supervision, including discovery matters. A status conference to discuss the above issue will be held on October 2, 2019 at 11:00 a.m. in Courtroom 17-D, United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 9/12/2019) ( Status Conference set for 10/2/2019 at 11:00 AM in Courtroom 17D, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker., Status Conference set for 12/9/2019 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 17D, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker.) (ks) (Entered: 09/12/2019)
88 ORDER: In light of Judge Parker's order extending the fact discovery deadline to November 26, 2019, ECF No. 85, the case management conference scheduled for October 2, 2019 is ADJOURNED to January 7, 2020, at 10:40 a.m. (Case Management Conference set for 1/7/2020 at 10:40 AM before Judge Analisa Torres.) (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 9/26/2019) (cf) (Entered: 09/26/2019)

10/01/2019 10/02/2019 10/02/2019
10/15/2019 10/16/2019

89 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Carolyn Kay Depoian on behalf of City of New York. (Depoian, Carolyn) (Entered: 10/01/2019)
90 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker: Status Conference held on 10/2/2019 : See Transcript for Details. A transcript of this proceeding is available by utilizing the attached order form. (ca) (Entered: 10/02/2019)
91 ORDER: Computer Vision Discovery. Plaintiffs' request that the Court compel the City to utilize computer vision technology to identify members of the putative class is denied without prejudice to renew. Settlement Conference. A settlement conference in this matter is scheduled for November 19, 2019 at 11:00 a.m. in Courtroom 17-D, United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York. Parties must attend in-person with their counsel. Corporate parties must send the person with decision making authority to settle the matter to the conference. The parties are instructed to complete the Settlement Conference Summary Report and prepare pre-conference submissions in accordance with the Judge Parker' s Individual Rules of Practice. Pre-conference submissions must be received by the Court no later than November 12, 2019 by 5:00 p.m. And as set forth herein. SO ORDERED., ( Settlement Conference set for 11/19/2019 at 11:00 AM in Courtroom 17D, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 10/02/2019) (ama) (Entered: 10/03/2019)
92 CONSENT LETTER MOTION to Stay Discovery (Partial) addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker. Document filed by City of New York. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Haider, Bilal) (Entered: 10/15/2019)
93 UNSEALING ORDER granting 92 Motion to Stay. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the City of New York, including the Office of the Corporation Counsel and the New York City Police Department, shall not be bound by the statutory sealing requirements of N.Y.C.P.L. §§160.50 and 160.55 for the limited purpose of allowing the City to search for and provide certain information to plaintiffs' counsel regarding those individuals who were arrested while wearing religious head coverings between March 1, 2014 and March 31, 2018, including but not limited to the number of such arrestees who were arrested wearing head coverings during the above timeframe; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the City of New York shall produce non-party information subject to N.Y.C.P.L. §§160.50 and 160.55 to

10/16/2019 10/29/2019 11/19/2019 11/19/2019
11/19/2019

plaintiffs; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the use of the abovereferenced records is restricted to use in the above-entitled civil rights action and shall be protected by plaintiffs' counsel as "Attorneys' Eyes Only," such that plaintiffs' counsel may not disclose the non-party information contained in the arrest data to anyone other than employees of their firms, relevant deponents (and any court reporter/ videographer at the deposition), and the Court. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 10/16/2019) (ks) (Entered: 10/16/2019)
94 MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: 92 CONSENT LETTER MOTION to Stay Discovery (Partial) addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker. filed by City of New York. ENDORSEMENT: Application Granted: Discovery Stayed through date of Settlement Conference. APPLICATION GRANTED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 10/16/2019) (ks) (Entered: 10/16/2019)
95 JOINT LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker from Emma L. Freeman dated October 29, 2019 re: REQUEST COURT TO ADDRESS DISCOVERY SCHEDULING AT THE NEXT SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families.(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 10/29/2019)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker: Settlement Conference held on 11/19/2019. (ca) (Entered: 11/19/2019)
96 ORDER SCHEDULING DISCOVERY AND SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE: A Discovery and Settlement Conference in this matter is scheduled for Monday, December 16, 2019 at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom 17-D, United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York. Parties must attend in-person with their counsel. Corporate parties must send the person with decision making authority to settle the matter to the conference. Updated ex-parte submissions must be received by the Court no later than Friday, December 13, 2019 by 5:00 p.m. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 11/19/2019) Settlement Conference set for 12/16/2019 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom 17D, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker. (ks) (Entered: 11/19/2019)
Set/Reset Hearings: Discovery Hearing set for 12/16/2019 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom 17D, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007

before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker. (ks) (Entered: 11/19/2019)

12/03/2019 97

JOINT LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker from Emma L. Freeman dated December 3, 2019 re: REQUEST FOR STATUS CONFERENCE ADJOURNMENT. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families.(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 12/03/2019)

12/04/2019

98 MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: 97 Letter, filed by Arwa Aziz, Turning Point for Women and Families, Jamilla Clark. ENDORSEMENT: APPLICATION GRANTED: The Status Conference scheduled for Monday, December 9, 2019 at 10:00 a.m. is hereby rescheduled to Thursday, January 23, 2020 at 9:45 a.m. APPLICATION GRANTED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 12/4/2019) ( Status Conference set for 1/23/2020 at 09:45 AM before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker.) (ks) (Entered: 12/04/2019)

12/16/2019

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker: Settlement Conference held on 12/16/2019. (ca) (Entered: 12/17/2019)

12/17/2019 99

ORDER SCHEDULING TELEPHONE CONFERENCE, A telephone conference in this matter will be held on Monday, January 13, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. Counsel for the parties are directed to call Judge Parker's Chambers at the scheduled time with counsel for all parties on the line. Please dial 212-805-0234. SO ORDERED. (Telephone Conference set for 1/13/2020 at 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 12/17/19) (yv) (Entered: 12/17/2019)

01/02/2020 100

JOINT LETTER addressed to Judge Analisa Torres from Emma L. Freeman dated January 2, 2020 re: REQUEST TO ADJOURN. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families.(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 01/02/2020)

01/02/2020

101 MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: 100 Letter filed by Arwa Aziz, Turning Point for Women and Families, Jamilla Clark. ENDORSEMENT: GRANTED. The case management conference scheduled for January 7, 2020 is ADJOURNED sine die. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 1/2/2020) (cf) (Entered: 01/02/2020)

01/13/2020
01/13/2020 01/19/2020 01/21/2020
01/21/2020 01/21/2020

102 ORDER SCHEDULING TELEPHONE CONFERENCE: A telephone conference in this matter will be held on January 21, 2020 at 12:30 p.m. Counsel for the parties are directed to call Judge Parkers Chambers at the scheduled time with counsel for all parties on the line. Please dial 212-805-0234. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 1/13/2020) Telephone Conference set for 1/21/2020 at 12:30 PM before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker. (ks) (Entered: 01/13/2020)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker: Telephone Conference held on 1/13/2020. (ca) (Entered: 01/13/2020)
103 LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker from Emma L. Freeman dated January 19, 2020 re: RESPONSE TO ADJOURN JOINT COURT TELEPHONE CONFERENCE. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families.(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 01/19/2020)
104 ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker from Jonathan C. Moore and Tahanie A. Aboushi dated January 17, 2020 re: letter requesting a telephone conference. ENDORSEMENT: APPLICATION GRANTED: The telephone conference call previously scheduled for Tuesday, January 21, 2020 at 12:30 p.m. is rescheduled to Tuesday, January 21, 2020 at 4:00 p.m. Counsel for the parties are directed to call Judge Parker's Chambers at the scheduled time with counsel for all parties on the line. Please dial 212-805-0234. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 1/21/2020) ( Telephone Conference set for 1/21/2020 at 04:00 PM before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker.)(ks) (Entered: 01/21/2020)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker: Telephone Conference held on 1/21/2020. (ca) (Entered: 01/21/2020)
105 ORDER SCHEDULING TELEPHONE CONFERENCE: A telephone conference in this matter will be held on Thursday, February 6, 2020 at 5:00 p.m. Counsel for the parties are directed to call Judge Parker's Chambers at the scheduled time with counsel for all parties on the line. Please dial 212-805-0234. SO ORDERED. (Telephone Conference set for 2/6/2020 at 05:00 PM before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 1/21/2020) (rro) (Entered: 01/21/2020)

01/22/2020 106

ORDER: The status conference in this matter currently scheduled for January 23, 2020 at 9:45 a.m. is hereby adjourned. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 1/22/2020) (ks) (Entered: 01/22/2020)

02/06/2020

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker: Telephone Conference held on 2/6/2020. (ca) (Entered: 02/07/2020)

02/07/2020

107 ORDER SCHEDULING SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE: A counsel only settlement conference in this matter is scheduled for Friday, February 21, 2020 at 10:30 a.m. in Courtroom 17-D, United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York. Updated pre-conference submissions must be received by the Court no later than February 19, 2020 at 5:00 p.m. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 1/21/2020) Settlement Conference set for 2/21/2020 at 10:30 AM in Courtroom 17D, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker. (ks) (Entered: 02/07/2020)

02/21/2020

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker: Settlement Conference held on 2/21/2020. (ca) (Entered: 02/21/2020)

02/21/2020

108 ORDER SCHEDULING TELEPHONE CONFERENCE: A telephone conference in this matter will be held on Tuesday, March 10, 2020 at 4:30 p.m. Counsel for the parties are directed to call Judge Parker's Chambers at the scheduled time with counsel for all parties on the line. Please dial 212-805-0234. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 1/21/2020) Telephone Conference set for 3/10/2020 at 04:30 PM before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker. (ks) Modified on 2/24/2020 (ks). (Entered: 02/21/2020)

03/05/2020

109 CONSENT LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to respond to plaintiffs most recent proposal addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker from Bilal Haider dated March 5, 2020., CONSENT LETTER MOTION to Adjourn Conference addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker from Bilal Haider dated March 5, 2020. Document filed by City of New York..(Haider, Bilal) (Entered: 03/05/2020)

03/09/2020

110 ORDER granting 109 Letter Motion to Adjourn Conference Settlement Conference set for 3/18/2020 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom 17D, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker. Defendants' request for extension of time to respond to most recent settlement proposal

extended 1 week. (HEREBY ORDERED by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker)(Text Only Order) (Parker, Katharine) (Entered: 03/09/2020)

03/10/2020

111 CONSENT LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker from Emma L. Freeman dated March 10, 2020 re: REQUEST TO ADJOURN SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families..(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 03/10/2020)

03/11/2020

112 MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: (111 in 1:18-cv-02334-ATKHP) Letter, filed by Arwa Aziz, Turning Point for Women and Families, Jamilla Clark. APPLICATION GRANTED: The settlement conference in this matter currently scheduled for Wednesday, March 18, 2020 at 2:00 p.m. is rescheduled to Monday, March 23, 2020 at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom 17-D, United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 3/11/2020) (ks) Modified on 3/11/2020 (ca). (Main Document 112 replaced on 3/11/2020) (ca). (Entered: 03/11/2020)

03/11/2020

Set/Reset Hearings: Settlement Conference set for 3/23/2020 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom 17D, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker. (ks) (Entered: 03/11/2020)

03/16/2020 113

ORDER CONVERTING SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE TO TELEPHONIC CONFERENCE : The Settlement Conference in this matter scheduled for Monday, March 23, 2020 at 2:00 p.m. is hereby converted to a telephonic conference. The Parties should call into the court conference line at (866) 434-5269 Code: 4858267. The Court will review procedures and then talk separately with each side by phone. The parties and their counsel must be available by phone from 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. so that the court can have more than one ex parte conversation with each side as needed. Each side shall establish its own conference call line to remain open during the settlement conference so that the court can join and re-join as needed. To ensure confidentiality, each side shall provide the court with the dial-in number and passcode for its conference line via an ex parte email to Parker_NYSDChambers@nysd.uscourts.gov. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 3/16/2020) ( Telephone Conference set for 3/23/2020 at 02:00 PM before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker.) (ks) Modified on 3/16/2020 (ks). (Entered: 03/16/2020)

03/23/2020

114 SCHEDULING ORDER: The parties are directed to meet and confer regarding the discovery schedule in and to provide the Court with a Joint Status Letter by 4/23/2020 addressing: 1) what discovery reasonably can be accomplished over the next 60 days and 2) whether any additional extensions of discovery are needed. The parties shall email the Court to NYSD_ParkerChambers@nysd.uscourts.gov with the status of their settlement discussions as to injunctive relief by 4/23/2020. (HEREBY ORDERED by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker) (Text Only Order) (Parker, Katharine) (Entered: 03/23/2020)

03/23/2020

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker: Settlement Telephone Conference held on 3/23/2020. (ca) (Entered: 03/26/2020)

04/23/2020

115 JOINT LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker from Emma L. Freeman dated April 23, 2020 re: REQUESTING ADJOURNMENT OF DISCOVERY DEADLINE. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families..(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 04/23/2020)

04/23/2020

116 SCHEDULING ORDER: Fact Discovery deadline extended to9/24/2020. Status letter due 6/23/2020. (HEREBY ORDERED by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker) (Text Only Order) (Parker, Katharine) (Entered: 04/23/2020)

04/24/2020

117 SCHEDULING ORDER: Settlement Conference set for 5/1/2020 at 10:00 AM ibefore Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker. The parties shall dial into the Courts AT&T line 866-434-5269 code 4858267. (HEREBY ORDERED by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker) (Text Only Order) (Parker, Katharine) (Entered: 04/24/2020)

05/18/2020 118

ORDER: The Court thanks the parties for the update and requests a status update within two weeks. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 5/18/2020) (jwh) (Entered: 05/18/2020)

06/18/2020

119 LETTER addressed to Judge Analisa Torres from Emma L. Freeman dated June 18, 2020 re: PRE-MOTION LETTER REGARDING CLASS CERTIFICATION. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families..(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 06/18/2020)

06/23/2020

120 JOINT LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker from Emma L. Freeman dated June 23, 2020 re: DISCOVERY STATUS. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla

Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families..(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 06/23/2020)

06/23/2020

121 ORDER. The Court is in receipt of the parties' letter dated today. The parties shall meet and confer on a proposed discovery schedule taking into account the anticipated Rule 23 briefing and submit a proposed revised schedule by July 15, 2020. The schedule shall set forth what portion of remaining discovery can proceed regardless and the portion of discovery that will be impacted by a decision on class certification and propose a schedule keyed off of the date of any such Rule 23 decision. (HEREBY ORDERED by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker) (Text Only Order) (Parker, Katharine) (Entered: 06/23/2020)

06/24/2020

122 CONSENT LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 119 Letter addressed to Judge Analisa Torres from Bilal Haider dated June 24, 2020. Document filed by City of New York..(Haider, Bilal) (Entered: 06/24/2020)

06/24/2020

123 ORDER granting 122 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. GRANTED. By June 30, 2020, Defendant shall file its response to Plaintiffs' pre-motion letter. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 6/24/2020) (kv) (Entered: 06/24/2020)

06/30/2020

124 LETTER addressed to Judge Analisa Torres from Bilal Haider dated June 30, 2020 re: PLAINTIFFS' PRE-MOTION LETTER REGARDING CLASS CERTIFICATION (ECF 119). Document filed by City of New York..(Haider, Bilal) (Entered: 06/30/2020)

07/02/2020

125 FILING ERROR - WRONG EVENT TYPE SELECTED FROM MENU - MOTION to Certify Class . Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families..(Wilson, Ogilvie) Modified on 8/6/2020 (db). (Entered: 07/02/2020)

07/06/2020 126

ORDER terminating 125 Motion to Certify Class. It is herebyORDERED that: 1. Plaintiffs' request to file a motion for class certification is GRANTED; 2. Defendant's request that Plaintiffs' motion for class certification "be held in abeyance," ECF No. 124, is DENIED; 3. By August 3, 2020, Plaintiffs shall file their motion for class certification; 4. By August 31, 2020, Defendant shall file its opposition; and 5. By September 21, 2020, Plaintiffs shall file their reply, if any. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 125. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 7/6/2020) (kv) (Entered: 07/06/2020)

07/06/2020 07/15/2020 07/16/2020
07/16/2020 07/30/2020 08/03/2020 08/03/2020
08/03/2020 08/03/2020

Set/Reset Deadlines: Motions due by 8/3/2020. Responses due by 8/31/2020 Replies due by 9/21/2020. (kv) (Entered: 07/06/2020)
127 JOINT LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker from Emma L. Freeman dated July 15, 2020 re: DISCOVERY DEADLINES. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families..(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 07/15/2020)
128 MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: 127 JOINT LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker from Emma L. Freeman dated July 15, 2020 re: DISCOVERY DEADLINES. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families. ENDORSEMENT: Proposed discovery schedule ADOPTED. The parties shall file a joint status report on 10/16/2020. So ordered. (Discovery due by 11/20/2020.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 7/16/2020) (rjm) (Entered: 07/16/2020)
Case Stay Lifted. (rjm) (Entered: 08/18/2020)
129 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Matthew D. Brinckerhoff on behalf of Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families..(Brinckerhoff, Matthew) (Entered: 07/30/2020)
130 MOTION to Certify Class NOTICE OF MOTION. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families..(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 08/03/2020)
131 DECLARATION of Emma L. Freeman in Support re: 130 MOTION to Certify Class NOTICE OF MOTION.. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - INTERIM ORDER No. 29, # 2 Exhibit B - JUNE 19, 2019 LETTER FROM CITY TO PLAINTIFFS, # 3 Exhibit C - SEPTEMBER 10,2019 JOINT LETTER TO COURT, # 4 Exhibit - D - DECEMBER 5, 2019 COVER LETTER FROM CITY TO PLAINTIFFS).(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 08/03/2020)
132 DECLARATION of PLAINTIFF ARWA AZIZ in Support re: 130 MOTION to Certify Class NOTICE OF MOTION.. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families..(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 08/03/2020)
133 DECLARATION of PLAINTIFF JAMILLA CLARK in Support re: 130 MOTION to Certify Class NOTICE OF MOTION..

08/03/2020 08/31/2020 08/31/2020 08/31/2020 09/10/2020
09/11/2020 09/23/2020
09/24/2020

Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families..(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 08/03/2020)
134 MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 130 MOTION to Certify Class NOTICE OF MOTION. . Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families..(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 08/03/2020)
135 MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Opposition re: 130 MOTION to Certify Class NOTICE OF MOTION. . Document filed by City of New York..(Depoian, Carolyn) (Entered: 08/31/2020)
136 DECLARATION of Peter Callaghan in Opposition re: 130 MOTION to Certify Class NOTICE OF MOTION.. Document filed by City of New York..(Depoian, Carolyn) (Entered: 08/31/2020)
137 DECLARATION of Carolyn K. Depoian in Opposition re: 130 MOTION to Certify Class NOTICE OF MOTION.. Document filed by City of New York. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B).(Depoian, Carolyn) (Entered: 08/31/2020)
138 FIRST LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply In Further Support of their Motion for Class Certification addressed to Judge Analisa Torres from Emma L. Freeman dated September 10, 2020. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families..(Freeman, Emma) (Entered: 09/10/2020)
139 ORDER granting 138 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. GRANTED. By October 5, 2020, Plaintiffs shall file their reply to Defendant's opposition to class certification. SO ORDERED. Replies due by 10/5/2020. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 9/11/2020) (kv) (Entered: 09/11/2020)
140 LETTER MOTION for Leave to File corrected memorandum of law and affidavit in opposition to plaintiffs' motion for certification and request for revised briefing schedule addressed to Judge Analisa Torres from Carolyn K. Depoian dated 9/23/2020. Document filed by City of New York..(Depoian, Carolyn) (Entered: 09/23/2020)
141 ORDER granting 140 LETTER MOTION for Leave to File corrected memorandum of law and affidavit in opposition to plaintiffs' motion for certification and request for revised briefing schedule addressed to Judge Analisa Torres from Carolyn K. Depoian dated 9/23/2020. Document filed by City of New York.

GRANTED. By September 25, 2020, Defendant shall file a revised opposition. By October 9, 2020, Plaintiffs shall file their reply. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 9/24/2020) (rjm) (Entered: 09/24/2020)

09/24/2020

Set/Reset Deadlines: Responses due by 9/25/2020. Replies due by 10/9/2020. (rjm) (Entered: 09/24/2020)

09/25/2020

142 MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Opposition re: 130 MOTION to Certify Class NOTICE OF MOTION. (corrected). Document filed by City of New York..(Depoian, Carolyn) (Entered: 09/25/2020)

09/25/2020

143 AFFIDAVIT of Peter Callaghan in Opposition re: 130 MOTION to Certify Class NOTICE OF MOTION.. Document filed by City of New York..(Depoian, Carolyn) (Entered: 09/25/2020)

09/30/2020 144

ORDER denying 20 Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiffs concede that the City is immune from punitive damages and that Aziz's state law claim for compensatory damages must be dismissed without prejudice because she filed an untimely notice of claim. PL Opp. at 6 n.1, ECF No. 31. Accordingly, Plaintiffs' demand for punitive damages is DISMISSED, and Aziz's state law claim for compensatory damages is DISMISSED without prejudice. See Warm in v. New York City Dep 't of Educ., No. 16 Civ. 8044, 2018 WL 1441382, at *7 (S.D.N.Y. Mai. 22, 2018) ("Because [p]laintiff could make an application in state court to file a late notice of claim, the Court dismisses these claims without prejudice."). The City's motion is otherwise DENIED. The Court concludes that the complaint's "well-pleaded factual allegations... plausibly give rise to an entitlement to relief." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 679 (2009). The Court shall issue a memorandum opinion addressing the surviving claims in due course. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 20. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 9/29/2020) (kv) (Entered: 09/30/2020)

10/09/2020

145 REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 130 MOTION to Certify Class NOTICE OF MOTION. . Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families..(Brinckerhoff, Matthew) (Entered: 10/09/2020)

10/16/2020

146 JOINT LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery and Status of Outstanding Discovery, per Court's Order (dkt# 128) addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker from O. Andrew F. Wilson dated October 16, 2020. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families..(Wilson, Ogilvie) (Entered: 10/16/2020)

10/19/2020

147 ORDER granting 146 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery. The Fact Discovery Deadline is hereby extended to January 18, 2021. A telephonic Status Conference in this matter is hereby scheduled for Tuesday, January 19, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. Counsel is directed to call into the court conference line at the scheduled time. Please dial (866) 434-5269 Code: 4858267. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 10/19/2020) (kv) (Entered: 10/19/2020)

10/19/2020

Set/Reset Hearings:( Telephone Conference set for 1/19/2021 at 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker.), Set/Reset Deadlines: ( Fact Discovery due by 1/18/2021.) (kv) Modified on 10/20/2020 (kv). (Entered: 10/19/2020)

10/26/2020

148 PROPOSED STIPULATION AND ORDER. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit (A) Revisions to Patrol Guide).(Wilson, Ogilvie) (Entered: 10/26/2020)

10/28/2020

149 JOINT LETTER MOTION to Stay DISCOVERY re: Pending the issuance of a ruling on Plaintiff's sub judice motion for class certification (with or without opinion) addressed to Judge Analisa Torres from O. Andrew F. Wilson dated October 28, 2020. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families..(Wilson, Ogilvie) (Entered: 10/28/2020)

10/30/2020 150

ORDER granting 149 Letter Motion to Stay. GRANTED. Within seven days of the Court's ruling on Plaintiffs' motion for class certification, the parties will update the Honorable Katharine H. Parker regarding discovery. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 10/30/2020) (cf) (Entered: 10/30/2020)

11/04/2020

151 NOTICE, CONSENT AND REFERENCE OF ENFORCEMENT OF STIPULATION AND ORDER OF SETTLEMENT TO A MAGISTRATE JUDGE: Consent to a magistrate judge's jurisdiction over and enforcement of a stipulation and order of settlement. The following parties consent to have United States Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker retain limited jurisdiction over both of the above-captioned cases for a period of time beginning on the date the separately-filed Stipulation and Order of Settlement is so ordered by the Court (the "Effective Date") and continuing until three years from the Implementation Date as set forth in that Stipulation and Order of Settlement for the limited purpose of enforcing and resolving good-faith disputes about the terms of this Stipulation and Order of Settlement and to resolve any motions for attorneys' fees arising from the Stipulation and

Order of Settlement. This limited consent shall not apply to any aspect of the continuing litigation and proceedings in Clark, et al. v. City of New York, 18cv-02334 (AT) (KHP), including, without limitation, the fully-submitted motion for class certification, future dispositive motions, trial, and the resolution of attorneys' fees for anything beyond that set forth in the Stipulation and Order of Settlement. IT IS ORDERED: The above-captioned matters are referred to United States Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker only for the limited purposes set forth above in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 11/4/2020) (kv) (Entered: 11/04/2020)

11/04/2020

152 AMENDED ORDER OF REFERENCE TO A MAGISTRATE JUDGE. Order that case be referred to the Clerk of Court for assignment to a Magistrate Judge for Consent under 28 U.S.C. 636(c) for limited purpose (e.g., dispositive motion, preliminary injunction), Purpose: Enforce Settlement Agreement at ECF No. 148. Settlement and General Pretrial (includes scheduling, discove1y, non-dispositive pretrial motions, and settlement). Referred to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker. (Signed by Judge Analisa Torres on 11/4/2020) (kv) (Entered: 11/04/2020)

11/05/2020 153

STIPULATION AND ORDER OF SETTLEMENT: IT IS HEREBY AGREED between the Parties that: Defendant City shall implement changes to those portions of its Patrol Guide governing the treatment of arrestees who wear religious head coverings. Those changes are documented in Exhibit A; as further set forth herein. This Stipulation and Order of Settlement does not resolve the monetary claims of the individual plaintiffs in Clark, the claims of the organizational plaintiff in Clark, or the purported class claim in Clark brought pursuant to F.R.C.P. 23(b)(3). To the extent an agreement as to the settlement of these claims can be reached between the Parties, the City will pay Plaintiffs in the Clark case amounts to be agreed upon and set forth in separate stipulated agreements. This Stipulation and Order of Settlement does not resolve the monetary claims of the individual plaintiffs in Elsayed. However, Defendants and the individual plaintiffs in Elsayed have reached an agreement to resolve these monetary claims, which will be set forth in a separate stipulated agreement. The parties agree that Plaintiffs' Counsel in the Clark and Elsayed cases are entitled to "reasonable attorneys' fees" under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 stemming from work done through the Effective Date. The parties shall memorialize an agreement with respect to Plaintiffs' Counsel's attorneys' fees for work done through the Effective Date in a separate agreement; as further set forth herein. (Signed by

Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 11/5/2020) (mro) (Entered: 11/05/2020)

01/06/2021

154 ORDER RESCHEDULING STATUS CONFERENCE: The telephonic Status Conference scheduled for Tuesday, January 19, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. is hereby rescheduled to Friday, January 22, 2021 at 2:30 p.m. Counsel for the parties are directed to call Judge Parker's court conference line at the scheduled time. Please dial (866) 434-5269, Access code: 4858267. SO ORDERED. Telephone Conference set for 1/22/2021 at 02:30 PM before Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 1/6/2021) (kv) (Entered: 01/06/2021)

01/06/2021

155 JOINT LETTER MOTION to Adjourn Conference sine die (status of Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification) addressed to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker from O. Andrew F. Wilson dated January 6, 2021. Document filed by Arwa Aziz, Jamilla Clark, Turning Point for Women and Families..(Wilson, Ogilvie) (Entered: 01/06/2021)

01/06/2021 156

ORDER granting 155 Letter Motion to Adjourn Conference. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 1/6/2021) (mro) (Entered: 01/07/2021)

PACER Service Center Transaction Receipt

PACER Login:
Description:
Billable Pages:

02/14/2021 18:23:00

CRClearinghouse Client Code:

Docket Report

Search Criteria:

19

Cost:

1:18-cv-02334-ATKHP
1.90

 
 CCaassee11:1:188--ccvv--0022333344--AATT--KKHHPP DDooccuummeenntt115438 FFilieledd1110/0/256/2/200 PPaaggee11ooff197

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
JAMILLA CLARK and ARWA AZIZ, on Behalf of Themselves and Others Similarly Situated, and TURNING POINT FOR WOMEN AND FAMILIES,
Plaintiffs,
-against-
CITY OF NEW YORK,
Defendant.
GEHAD ELSAYED and LAILA IBRAHIM, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
-against-
CITY OF NEW YORK; NYPD Officer CHENISE BRODIE (Shield No. 28113); and NYPD Officers John and Jane Doe # 1, 2, 3, etc.,
Defendants.

11/5/2020 No. 18-cv-02334 (AT) (KHP)
No. 18-cv-10566 (AT) (KHP)

STIPULATION AND ORDER OF SETTLEMENT WHEREAS, Plaintiffs Jamilla Clark, Arwa Aziz, and Turning Point for Women and Families commenced an action by filing a Complaint on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated on March 16, 2018, alleging, inter alia, that Defendant City of New York violated their federal, state, and constitutional rights under the Religious Land Use and

CCaassee11:1:188--ccvv--0022333344--AATT--KKHHPP DDooccuummeenntt115438 FFilieledd1110/0/256/2/200 PPaaggee22ooff197
Institutionalized Persons Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc et seq. (“RLUIPA”), the First Amendment, and the New York State Constitution by requiring that New York City Police Department (“NYPD”) arrestees remove any religious head covering for a mug shot (the “Clark Case”);
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs Gehad Elsayed and Laila Ibrahim commenced an action by filing a Complaint on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated on November 13, 2018, alleging, inter alia, that Defendants City of New York, NYPD Officer Chenise Brodie, and John and Jane Doe NYPD Officers violated their federal, state, and constitutional rights under RLUIPA, the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments, and New York state law by requiring that Muslim women who wear a hijab remove their hijab for a mug shot or search if arrested by the NYPD (the “Elsayed Case”);
WHEREAS, all Plaintiffs agree that the non-monetary relief detailed herein obviates the need for any motion practice as it relates to the Plaintiffs’ class-wide claim for injunctive relief;
WHEREAS, counsel in the Elsayed case also agrees to the declaratory relief set forth herein in lieu of an application for class certification pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23;
WHEREAS, all Plaintiffs agree that this relief is the best interests of the putative class; WHEREAS, Defendants continue to deny any and all liability arising out of all Plaintiffs’ allegations; WHEREAS, Plaintiffs have authorized their counsel in the Clark and Elsayed cases (collectively “Plaintiffs’ Counsel”) to settle this matter on the terms set forth below; WHEREAS, Plaintiffs and Defendants in both the Clark Case and the Elsayed Case (collectively the “Parties”) wish to voluntarily resolve the injunctive and policy-related claims in both matters; IT IS HEREBY AGREED between the Parties that:

CCaassee11:1:188--ccvv--0022333344--AATT--KKHHPP DDooccuummeenntt115438 FFilieledd1110/0/256/2/200 PPaaggee33ooff197
NYPD PATROL GUIDE, TRAINING, AND PRECINCT FACILITIES 1. Revisions to Patrol Guide. Defendant City shall implement changes to those portions of its Patrol Guide governing the treatment of arrestees who wear religious head coverings. Those changes are documented in Exhibit A.
(i) A Finest Message, a copy of which will be provided to Plaintiffs’ Counsel prior to issuance, shall be distributed in the NYPD’s usual and customary manner of distribution within sixty (60) days of the lifting of the state of emergency in New York City by either the Governor of the State of New York or the Mayor of the City of New York (the “Implementation Date”), and shall reference the changes to the Patrol Guide documented in Exhibit A.
2. Borough Court Sections. Within sixty (60) days of the Implementation Date, Defendants shall require each Borough Court Section to provide a private space for searching and/or photographing arrestees who wear religious head coverings.
3. Training. Within sixty (60) days of the Implementation Date, Defendant City shall develop a training that covers the Patrol Guide revisions as set forth in Exhibit A, which governs the treatment of arrestees who are wearing religious head coverings when they are arrested. The training will be mandated for NYPD officers, supervisors, cadets, and members of the photographing unit. The NYPD will share all of its training materials with Plaintiffs’ Counsel for comment. Such training will include:
(i) Instruction on the religious free exercise rights of people who are arrested; (ii) Instruction regarding the scenarios in which the NYPD is permitted to
remove the religious head covering of an arrestee in its custody; and

CCaassee11:1:188--ccvv--0022333344--AATT--KKHHPP DDooccuummeenntt115438 FFilieledd1110/0/256/2/200 PPaaggee44ooff197
(iii) Instruction regarding the documentation that must be generated when an arrestee’s religious head covering is removed. REPORTING
4. Annual Reporting. Every twelve months for a three (3) year period from the Implementation Date, Defendant City shall provide Plaintiffs’ Counsel with the number of arrestees whose religious head coverings were removed for purposes of photographing, as well as the sex of each such arrestee, the charge(s) issued against each such arrestee, and the type of religious head covering each such arrestee wore. In all instances where a religious head covering is removed, a copy of the command log entry setting forth the reasons for the removal will be provided to Plaintiffs’ Counsel. The foregoing information will be provided in accordance with N.Y.C.P.L. § 160.50/160.55.
5. Material Changes to Patrol Guide. Notice of any potential material changes to the Patrol Guide provisions involving the removal of religious head coverings—or to the practices and procedures related to such removal—shall be provided to Plaintiffs’ Counsel prior to the enactment of such material changes. “Material changes” are changes that (1) alter the presumption of non-removal for Department photographs or (2) otherwise significantly alter the circumstances under which removal of a religious head covering is permitted. The parties agree that, if they cannot reach agreement about any proposed material changes to the Patrol Guide provisions involving the removal of religious head coverings (or to the practices and procedures related to such removal), either party is entitled to seek relief from the Court with respect to the changes at issue.
6. Attorneys’ Eyes Only. Any and all documents provided to Plaintiffs’ Counsel by Defendant City pursuant to this Stipulation and Order of Settlement shall be considered

CCaassee11:1:188--ccvv--0022333344--AATT--KKHHPP DDooccuummeenntt115438 FFilieledd1110/0/256/2/200 PPaaggee55ooff197
Confidential and deemed Attorneys’ Eyes Only. Any application to de-designate documentation supplied to Plaintiffs’ Counsel shall be made to the Court for good cause shown.
ENFORCEMENT AND COURT JURISDICTION 7. Enforceability. The terms of the parties’ Stipulation and Order of Settlement shall be enforceable through the Court. 8. Good Faith. The parties shall attempt in good faith to resolve disputes over the terms and/or implementation of this Stipulation and Order of Settlement without judicial intervention. 9. Continued Jurisdiction. The parties consent to Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker retaining jurisdiction over both of the above-captioned cases for a period of time beginning on the date this Stipulation and Order of Settlement is so ordered by the Court (the “Effective Date”) and continuing until three years from the Implementation Date for the purpose of enforcing and resolving good-faith disputes about the terms of this Stipulation and Order of Settlement and to resolve any motions for attorneys’ fees.
OUTSTANDING CLAIMS 10. This Stipulation and Order of Settlement does not resolve the monetary claims of the individual plaintiffs in Clark, the claims of the organizational plaintiff in Clark, or the purported class claim in Clark brought pursuant to F.R.C.P. 23(b)(3). To the extent an agreement as to the settlement of these claims can be reached between the Parties, the City will pay Plaintiffs in the Clark case amounts to be agreed upon and set forth in separate stipulated agreements. 11. This Stipulation and Order of Settlement does not resolve the monetary claims of the individual plaintiffs in Elsayed. However, Defendants and the individual plaintiffs in

CCaassee11:1:188--ccvv--0022333344--AATT--KKHHPP DDooccuummeenntt115438 FFilieledd1110/0/256/2/200 PPaaggee66ooff197
Elsayed have reached an agreement to resolve these monetary claims, which will be set forth in a separate stipulated agreement.
ATTORNEYS’ FEES 12. The parties agree that Plaintiffs’ Counsel in the Clark and Elsayed cases are entitled to “reasonable attorneys’ fees” under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 stemming from work done through the Effective Date. The parties shall memorialize an agreement with respect to Plaintiffs’ Counsel’s attorneys’ fees for work done through the Effective Date in a separate agreement. 13. Plaintiffs also reserve their right to seek attorneys’ fees and costs for work done relating to the Reporting Period, including but not limited to fees and costs incurred in filing any motions to enforce this Stipulation and Order of Settlement. In the event that the parties are unable to reach agreement as to a request for attorneys’ fees and costs, Plaintiffs’ Counsel will submit fee applications in their respective cases on a schedule to be so ordered by the Court. Defendants reserve their right to oppose any of Plaintiffs’ Counsel’s requests for attorneys’ fees.
APPLICATIONS AND PARTIES BOUND 14. This Stipulation and Order of Settlement applies to, and is intended to be binding upon, the Plaintiffs in both the Clark Case and the Elsayed Case, Plaintiffs’ Counsel, Defendants, and the City’s officers, agents, employees, successors, and assigns. The undersigned representatives of the Plaintiffs certify that they are authorized to enter into and consent to the terms and conditions of this Stipulation and Order of Settlement and to execute and legally bind the Plaintiffs to it. The undersigned representatives of the Defendants certify

CCaassee11:1:188--ccvv--0022333344--AATT--KKHHPP DDooccuummeenntt115438 FFilieledd1110/0/256/2/200 PPaaggee77ooff197
that they are authorized to enter into and consent to the terms and conditions of this Stipulation and to execute and legally bind the Defendants to it.
15. Defendants deny any and all liability and deny that they had or have a policy, or engaged in or currently engage in a pattern or practice that deprived persons of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the United States and the State of New York.
16. This Stipulation and Order of Settlement does not, and shall not be deemed to, constitute an admission by Defendants as to the validity or accuracy of any of the allegations, assertions, or claims made by Plaintiffs. This Stipulation and Order of Settlement does not constitute an admission, adjudication, or finding on the merits of this Civil Action.
[INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]

CCaassee11:1:188--ccvv--0022333344--AATT--KKHHPP DDooccuummeenntt115438 FFilieledd1110/0/256/2/200 PPaaggee88ooff197

Dated:

2FWREHU, 2020 New York, New York

EMERY CELLI BRINCKERHOFF ABADY BELDOCK LEVINE & HOFFMAN LLP WARD & MAAZEL LLP

By: __________________ O. Andrew F. Wilson Emma L. Freeman 600 Fifth Avenue, 10th Floor New York, NY 10020 (212) 763-5000

By: ___________________ Jonathan Moore Luna Droubi Marc Arena 99 Park Avenue, Penthouse Suite New York, NY 10016 Tel. (212) 490-0400

SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY OVERSIGHT PROJECT

THE ABOUSHI LAW FIRM

By: __________________ Albert Fox Cahn 40 Rector Street, 9th Floor New York, NY 10006
Attorneys for Clark Plaintiffs

By: ___________________ Tahanie Aboushi 1441 Broadway New York, NY 10018 Tel. (212) 391-8500
Attorneys for Elsayed Plaintiffs

JAMES E. JOHNSON Corporation Counsel of the City of New York
By: s/Rachel Seligman Weiss ________________ Rachel Seligman Weiss Bilal Haider Carolyn Depoian 100 Church Street New York, NY 10007 (212) 356-2422
Attorney for Defendants

CCaassee11:1:188--ccvv--0022333344--AATT--KKHHPP DDooccuummeenntt115438 FFilieledd1110/0/256/2/200 PPaaggee99ooff197

Dated:

__November 5_, 2020 New York, New York

SO ORDERED.
______________________________ HON. KATHARINE H. PARKER

CCaassee 11::1188--ccvv--0022333344--AATT--KKHHPP DDooccuummeenntt 115438-1FilFedile1d11/005/2/260/20PaPgaeg1e01oof f187
EXHIBIT A

CCaassee 11::1188--ccvv--0022333344--AATT--KKHHPP DDooccuummeenntt 115438-1FilFedile1d11/005/2/260/20PaPgaeg1e12oof f187

T he li nke d i m ag e c an not be di s pl ayed. T he fil e m ay have been m ov ed, r enam ed, or del et ed. V erif y t hat t he l i nk poi nt s t o t he c orr ec t fi l e and l oc at i on.

DRAFT INTERIM ORDER

SUBJECT: ARRESTS - RELIGIOUS HEAD COVERING GUIDELINES

DATE ISSUED:
09-03-20

REFERENCE:
**P.G. 208 SERIES

NUMBER:
Draft 35

1. A religious head covering worn pursuant to a sincerely held religious belief can be retained by the prisoner while in the custody of the Department. However, the religious head covering must be temporarily removed when conducting the mandatory Department search for weapons and/or contraband, but will be returned to the prisoner after that search unless the head covering presents a risk to the safety of the prisoner or others. In addition, there are also other limited circumstances when the religious head covering can be removed for purposes of photographing and conducting an identification procedure (e.g. lineup identification, photo array, etc.). In those limited circumstances where temporary removal of the religious head covering is necessary, members will take all possible steps, when consistent with personal safety, to respect a prisoner’s privacy, rights and religious beliefs. In order to provide uniformed members of the service with the Department’s policy regarding incidents where an arrest is effected and the prisoner is wearing a religious head covering, the following Patrol Guide procedure 208-XX entitled, “Arrests – Religious Head Covering Guidelines” has been established.
2. Therefore, effective immediately, when an arrest is effected and a prisoner is wearing a religious head covering, the following new Patrol Guide procedure 208-XX, “Arrests - Religious Head Covering Guidelines” will be complied with:

PURPOSE SCOPE
DEFINITION

To provide uniformed members of the service with guidelines to follow when an arrest is effected and the prisoner is wearing a religious head covering.
It is the policy of the Department that prisoners must be searched for weapons and contraband, and that photographs must be taken. Members will take all possible steps, when consistent with personal safety, to respect a prisoner’s privacy, rights and religious beliefs when it comes to removing their religious head covering. Prisoners will retain their religious head coverings while in Department custody, except in the limited circumstances described below.
RELIGIOUS HEAD COVERING – a head covering that appears to be related to a sincerely held religious belief, or that a prisoner advised is related to such (e.g., yarmulke, wig, habit, turban, kufi, headscarf, hijab, burqa, etc.).
OVAL OF THE FACE – for the purpose of this procedure, the oval of the face is an individual’s forehead, eyes, nose, mouth, chin and jawline.
UNCOVERED PHOTOGRAPH – for the purpose of this procedure, a photograph taken at the borough court section with a prisoner’s religious head covering removed, in private by a member of the same gender, when there is reasonable suspicion that the prisoner has a distinguishing feature not otherwise fully visible that is of investigative value to the current arrest or investigation, or the prisoner was arrested outside their residence while not wearing a head covering.

CCaassee 11::1188--ccvv--0022333344--AATT--KKHHPP DDooccuummeenntt 115438-1FilFedile1d11/005/2/260/20PaPgaeg1e23oof f187

PROCEDURE
ARRESTING OFFICER

When an arrestee is wearing a religious head covering:
1. Comply with P.G. 208-02, “Arrests-Removal to Department Facility for Processing,” P.G. 208-03, “Arrests-General Processing,” P.G. 208-27, “Desk Appearance Ticket – General Procedure,” and P.G. 212-123, “Use of Body-Worn Cameras,” as appropriate.

ARRESTING OFFICER
DESK OFFICER

SEARCH OF RELIGIOUS HEAD COVERINGS:
2. Inform prisoner wearing a religious head covering that it must be temporarily removed and searched. a. Advise prisoner that removal and search will be conducted in private and that search will be conducted by a member of the same gender, as per P.G. 208-05, “Arrests – General Search Guidelines.”
3. Perform thorough search for weapons and contraband. a. Use Tactical Hand-Held Metal Detector, if available and as appropriate.
4. Do not retain religious head covering for safekeeping unless: a. There is reasonable suspicion, based on articulable facts then known to the arresting officer, that allowing the arrestee to wear the head covering is likely to be dangerous to life, can be used to harm self, or can be used to harm others; and b. Permission has been obtained from the desk officer to retain the head covering when consistent with personal safety and the safety of the prisoner.
5. Approve/disapprove removal and retention of religious head covering for safekeeping or evidence purposes.

NOTE:

Temporary head coverings are available from the Quartermaster Section. An emergency supply will be stored at each patrol borough.

6. Provide a temporary head covering to prisoner when removing and retaining head covering for safekeeping or evidence purposes, if necessary.

7. Make Command Log Entry indicating reason(s) for removal and retention of head covering, if removed for safekeeping or evidence purposes, or if removal was disapproved.

NOTE:

Where applicable, a religious head covering may be vouchered as evidence in accordance with Patrol Guide Section 208-03 (12) if there is reasonable suspicion the religious head covering is material to the investigation.

ARRESTING

WHEN TAKING PHOTOGRAPH AT THE COMMAND OF ARREST FOR A PRISONER MOVEMENT SLIP, A DESK APPEARANCE TICKET, OR AN IDENTIFICATION PROCEDURE (PHOTO ARRAY OR LINE UP):

OFFICER

8. Take photograph of prisoner with religious head covering in place.

CCaassee 11::1188--ccvv--0022333344--AATT--KKHHPP DDooccuummeenntt 115438-1FilFedile1d11/005/2/260/20PaPgaeg1e34oof f187

a. Ensure the oval of the face (forehead, eyes, nose, mouth, chin and jawline) are visible in Department photograph. (1) Religious head coverings that obscure the oval of the face may be moved to expose the oval of the face.

NOTE:

An uncovered photograph will NOT be taken unless: a. There is reasonable suspicion that the arrestee has a distinguishing feature
not otherwise fully visible with head covering in place (e.g., hair color, tattoos, piercings, visible injury, moles, birth marks, etc.) that is of investigative value to the current investigation or arrest; or b. There is reasonable suspicion that the arrestee committed the crime outside their residence while not wearing a head covering.

If an uncovered photograph must be taken, the prisoner MUST be transported to the appropriate borough court section, where the photograph will be taken in a private area by a member of the service of the same gender. Uncovered photographs will NOT be taken at the command of arrest.

Comply with D.G. 505-03, “Photo Array Identification Procedure” and D.G. 50506, “Lineup Identification Procedure,” as necessary.

DESK OFFICER

9. Notify borough court section supervisor, if an uncovered photograph

must be taken.

a. Inform borough court section of gender of the prisoner in order to

have a member of the service of the same gender available to take the

photograph.

10. Make Command Log entry noting the reason for the uncovered photograph

and the name of the borough court section supervisor notified.

11. Direct arresting/escorting officer to transport prisoner to borough court

section, as necessary, for completion of arrest processing.

a.

If the prisoner is eligible for a DESK APPEARANCE TICKET,

the DESK APPEARANCE TICKET will be issued at, and the

prisoner will be released from, the borough court section.

WHEN TAKING PHOTOGRAPH AT BOROUGH COURT SECTION:

BOROUGH

COURT SECTION/

PHOTO UNIT

12. Take a photograph of prisoner with religious head covering in place, in all cases,

MEMBER OF

when a prisoner is transported to the borough court section.

SERVICE

a. Ensure the oval of the face (forehead, eyes, nose, mouth, chin and jawline)

are visible in Department photograph.

(1) Religious head coverings that obscure the oval of the face may be

moved to expose the oval of the face.

NOTE:

An uncovered photograph will NOT be taken unless: a. There is reasonable suspicion that the arrestee has a distinguishing feature
not otherwise fully visible with head covering in place (e.g., hair color,

CCaassee 11::1188--ccvv--0022333344--AATT--KKHHPP DDooccuummeenntt 115438-1FilFedile1d11/005/2/260/20PaPgaeg1e45oof f187

tattoos, piercings, visible injury, moles, birth marks, etc.) that is of investigative value to the current investigation or arrest; or b. There is reasonable suspicion that the arrestee committed the crime outside their residence while not wearing a head covering.

13. When an uncovered photograph must be taken in addition to the covered photograph, take uncovered photograph in private area. a. Tag uncovered photograph in “PhotoManager System” database, limiting the permissible uses of the photograph. b. Do not tag the covered photograph in the “PhotoManager System.”

NOTE:

The uncovered photograph MUST be taken by a member of the service of the same gender as the prisoner.

BOROUGH

COURT SECTION

SUPERVISOR

14.

Ensure that uncovered photograph is taken in a private space (e.g., curtained area, etc.) by a member of the service of the same gender.

ADDITIONAL DATA
RELATED PROCEDURES
FORMS AND REPORTS

Every effort will be made not to prolong detention beyond what is necessary in order to take an official Department photograph while accommodating prisoner’s sincerely held religious beliefs.
Members of the service may seek the help of clergy, or an interpreter if appropriate, to help the prisoner understand the need to remove their religious head covering.
Any questions or requests for additional guidance concerning religious head coverings will be directed to the Legal Bureau.
Arrests - Removal to Department Facility for Processing (P.G. 208-02) Arrests - General Processing (P.G. 208-03) Arrests - General Search Guidelines (P.G. 208-05) Arrests - Security Measures (P.G. 208-06) Photographable Offenses (P.G. 208-07) Photo Array Identification Procedure (D.G. 505-03) Lineup Identification Procedure (D.G. 505-06)
DESK APPEARANCE TICKET Prisoner Movement Slip

CCaassee 11::1188--ccvv--0022333344--AATT--KKHHPP DDooccuummeenntt 115438-1FilFedile1d11/005/2/260/20PaPgaeg1e56oof f187

3. Patrol Guide 208-02, “Arrests - Removal to Department Facility for Processing” is amended as follows:

a. DELETE subdivision “a,” and accompanying substeps “(1)” through “(5),” under step “12,” opposite actor “DESK OFFICER,” on page “2.”

4. Patrol Guide 208-03, “Arrests - General Processing” is amended as follows:

a. DELETE current step “37,” and accompanying subdivisions “a” through “c,” opposite actor “DESK OFFICER,” on page “10,” and in its place, ADD new step “36,”, opposite actor “DESK OFFICER,” on page “10,” to read:

“DESK OFFICER

36. Comply with P.G. 208-XX, ‘Arrests –Religious Head Covering Guidelines,’ as necessary, if prisoner is wearing a religious head covering.”

CCaassee 11::1188--ccvv--0022333344--AATT--KKHHPP DDooccuummeenntt 115438-1FilFedile1d11/005/2/260/20PaPgaeg1e67oof f187

b. DELETE current step “44,” and accompanying subdivisions “a” through “c,” opposite actor “BOROUGH COURT SECTION SUPERVISOR,” on page “11,”
and in its place, ADD new step “43”, opposite actor “BOROUGH COURT SECTION SUPERVISOR,” on page “11,” to read:

“BOROUGH COURT SECTION SUPERVISOR 43.

Comply with P.G. 208-XX, ‘Arrests – Religious Head Covering Guidelines,’ as necessary, if prisoner is wearing a religious head covering.”

5. Patrol Guide 208-05, “Arrests - General Search Guidelines” is amended as follows:
a. DELETE current substep “(3),” and corresponding subdivisions “a” through “e” and accompanying “NOTE,” under heading “B. SEARCH AT POLICE FACILITY,” following step “1,” opposite actor “ARRESTING OFFICER,” on pages “1” and “2,” and in its place, ADD new substep “(3),” opposite actor “ARRESTING OFFICER,” on page “2,” to read:”

“ARRESTING OFFICER

(3) Comply with P.G. 208-XX, ‘Arrests – Religious Head Covering Guidelines,’ as necessary, if prisoner is wearing a religious head covering.”

CCaassee 11::1188--ccvv--0022333344--AATT--KKHHPP DDooccuummeenntt 115438-1FilFedile1d11/005/2/260/20PaPgaeg1e78oof f187

6. Patrol Guide 208-07, “Photographable Offenses” is amended as follows:

a. DELETE “third” paragraph of “ADDITIONAL DATA” statement, on page “2.”

7. Patrol Guide 210-08, “Guidelines for Prisoner Holding Pens” is amended as follows:

a. DELETE current subdivision “e,” and accompanying substeps “(1)” through “(6),” under step “5,” opposite actor “DESK OFFICER/DETECTIVE SQUAD
SUPERVISOR,” on pages “1” and “2, and in its place, ADD new subdivision “e,”
opposite actor “DESK OFFICER/DETECTIVE SQUAD SUPERVISOR,” on pages “1” and “2,” to read:”

“DESK OFFICER/ DETECTIV E SQUAD SUPERVIS OR

e. Comply with P.G. 208-XX, ‘Arrests – Religious Head Covering Guidelines,’ as necessary, if prisoner is wearing a religious head covering.”

8. The initial supply of temporary head coverings will be available through the Office of Management Analysis and Planning (OMAP).

9. Subsequently, requests for temporary head coverings will be requisitioned through the Quartermaster Section using the following information:

INDEX NUMBER

PD NUMBER

TITLE

XXXX

XXX-XXX

TEMPORARY HEAD COVERING

10. Upon publication, this Interim Order has been incorporated into the OnLine
Patrol Guide.

11. Any provisions of the Department Manual or any other Department directives in conflict with the contents of this Order are suspended.

BY DIRECTION OF THE POLICE COMMISSIONER
DISTRIBUTION All Commands

 
 29 Rev. to Patrol Guides 208-03 and 208-07 (Mar. 2, 2015) (“Interim Order 29”), ECF No. 131-1. If an arrestee indicates a preference to retain their head covering for a mug shot, he or she will be transported to One Police Plaza, where the “arrestee can remove their religious head covering and have their photograph taken in private.” Id. ¶¶ 1, 2(a). At One Police Plaza, a “member of the service of the same gender [as the arrestee]” must be available to take the photograph. Id. ¶ 2(a). Additionally, arrestees who are transported there “will be informed that their arrest processing may be delayed due to operational requirements.” Id. ¶ 3(a). The resulting booking photographs, which depict arrestees without religious head coverings, are maintained by the NYPD and viewable by others. Clark Decl. ¶ 10, ECF No. 133; Aziz Decl. ¶ 12, ECF No. 132.
I. Named Plaintiffs On January 9, 2017, Jamilla Clark was arrested for violation of an order of protection. Clark
Decl. ¶ 4. Clark informed the arresting officers that, as a practicing Muslim, she could not come into physical contact with men and was required to wear her hijab—a garment worn by many Muslim women that covers the ears, hair, and neck, but leaves the entire face exposed3—at all times. Id. ¶¶ 2–3, 5. Clark uses a hijab because she believes her faith dictates that no man outside of a woman’s immediate family should see her uncovered hair, head, and neck. Id. ¶ 3. Clark “covers” every day. Id.
Despite Clark’s explanation of her religious beliefs, officers at NYPD Central Booking ordered her to take off her hijab for a mug shot. Id. ¶ 6. Clark reiterated that she could not remove it in front of men who do not belong to her immediate family because of her Muslim faith. Id. Officers informed Clark that she would be criminally prosecuted if she did not take off the hijab, and one supervisor made hostile comments about Muslims. Id. ¶ 7. Later, Clark was transported to One
arrestee has a relevant distinguishing feature that is not fully visible unless the covering is removed, or (2) that the arrestee committee the crime outside of his or her residence while not wearing a head covering. ECF No. 148-1 at 3–4. 3 Unlike a hijab, a niqab is a veil that covers the face. Compl. ¶ 16. Neither Clark nor Aziz wears a niqab. Id.
2

Police Plaza, where—fearful of criminal charges—she removed her hijab to be photographed in a private room. Id. ¶ 8. Clark observed a surveillance camera there, and later another officer showed the picture to approximately five male officers. Id.
The removal of Clark’s hijab left her “extremely agitated, distraught, and tearful.” Id. ¶ 9. Clark alleges that “the NYPD still has multiple photographs of [her] without [her] hijab” and that she “continue[s] to experience distress and humiliation when [she] think[s] about unknown men viewing these photographs.” Id. ¶ 10.
On August 30, 2017, Arwa Aziz voluntarily submitted herself to NYPD custody at the SixtyEighth Precinct in Brooklyn, after her sister-in-law obtained an order of protection and requested that the police arrest Aziz for violating the order. Aziz Decl. ¶¶ 4–5. Aziz wears her hijab daily and believes her faith requires as much. Id. ¶ 3. After Aziz arrived at the precinct, NYPD officers took her photograph with her hijab on, then drove her to Brooklyn Central Booking to be photographed again. Id. ¶ 6. Once there, in a hallway with more than thirty male prisoners, officers demanded that Aziz take off her hijab to be photographed. Id. Aziz repeated that, for religious reasons, she could not remove it. Id. ¶ 7. The officers informed Aziz that she could have her picture taken privately at One Police Plaza, but warned her a female photographer might not be available, and threatened to “restart” the booking process if she chose to relocate. Id. ¶ 8.
Having waited for close to one hour, Aziz asked the officers if she could push her hijab back to reveal her bangs and hairline for the photo. Id. ¶ 9. The officers repeated their refusal. Id. Again, they ordered Aziz to remove her hijab entirely. Id. In tears, Aziz finally complied. Id. ¶ 10. For about five minutes, officers photographed Aziz. Id.
Aziz believes that “the NYPD still has multiple photographs of [her] without [her] hijab” and she “continue[s] to experience distress and humiliation when [she] think[s] about unknown men viewing these photographs.” Id. ¶ 12.
3

DISCUSSION I. Legal Standards
For a matter to proceed as a class action, a plaintiff must satisfy the following prerequisites: (1) the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable; (2) there are questions of law or fact common to the class; (3) the claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the claims or defenses of the class; and (4) the representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a). In addition to satisfying the Rule 23(a) prerequisites, the plaintiff must qualify the proposed class under one of three Rule 23(b) categories. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b); see also Brown v. Kelly, 609 F.3d 467, 476 (2d Cir. 2010). Rule 23(b)(3)—the provision under which Plaintiffs move—is appropriate in cases in which common questions of law or fact predominate over individual issues, and where a class action is the superior method of adjudicating the controversy. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3). Rule 23 is more than a “mere pleading standard.” Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 564 U.S. 338, 350 (2011). The movant must establish each of Rule 23’s requirements by a “preponderance of the evidence.” Teamsters Local 445 Freight Div. Pension Fund v. Bombardier Inc., 546 F.3d 196, 202 (2d Cir. 2008). II. Analysis
A. Rule 23 Prerequisites Although it is “not explicitly spelled out in Rule 23, courts in this circuit have added an ‘implied requirement of ascertainability’ with respect to the class definition.” Hamelin v. Faxton-St. Luke’s Healthcare, 274 F.R.D. 385, 393 (N.D.N.Y. 2011) (quoting In re Initial Public Offerings Sec. Litig. (In re IPO), 471 F.3d 24, 30 (2d Cir. 2006)). Specifically, courts have required that “a class be identifiable before it may be properly certified.” Id. at 396 (citing Dunnigan v. Metro. Life. Ins. Co., 214 F.R.D. 125, 135 (S.D.N.Y. 2003)). “An identifiable class exists if its members can be
4

ascertained by reference to objective criteria.” Stinson v. City of New York, 282 F.R.D. 360, 367 (S.D.N.Y. 2012) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Additionally, courts also address whether a class is overbroad before evaluating a class under Rule 23. See In re Fosamax Prods. Liab. Litig., 248 F.R.D. 389, 397 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) (“[U]ntil a class of persons alleged to be entitled to relief is defined, the [c]ourt cannot conduct the numerosity, commonality, typicality and adequacy analyses that must precede certification.”).
Plaintiffs’ proposed class includes “all persons who were required to remove their religious head covering for a post-arrest photograph while in custody of the” NYPD. Pl. Mot. ¶ 1; see Pl. Mem. at 17, ECF No. 134. The City maintains spreadsheets that identify every individual who would fall into this proposed class between March 16, 2014, and March 16, 2018, Freeman Decl. ¶¶ 10–15, 19–26, ECF No. 131, and has the ability to identify other potential class members outside of this time period, id. Thus, because class members can be identified using objective criteria, the class is ascertainable.
The proposed class is not overbroad despite including men and non-Muslims. Although a person’s religious beliefs are personal and subjective, the Court will not evaluate the person’s interpretation of religious doctrine. See, e.g., United States v. Lee, 455 U.S. 252, 257 (1982) (“It is not within ‘the judicial function and judicial competence,’ . . . to determine whether appellee or the Government has the proper interpretation of the Amish faith; ‘[c]ourts are not arbiters of scriptural interpretation.’” (quoting Thomas v. Review Bd. of Indiana Emp’t Sec. Div., 450 U.S. 707, 716 (1981) (alterations in original)). Consequently, the Court need not conduct an individual determination regarding “whether each putative class member was wearing their head covering pursuant to a genuinely held religious belief,” Def. Mem. at 8, ECF No. 135, that is, whether the individual’s religion genuinely mandates them to wear the head covering. Rather, the Court agrees with Plaintiffs that certification of this class is proper because “a core legal question transcends factual distinctions”
5

and because “all class members suffered the same injury”; what particular religion causes a putative

class member to wear the head covering does not affect the legal question of whether having the head

covering removed pursuant to the Policy violates their religious beliefs. Pl. Reply at 2–3, ECF No.

145; M.K.B. v. Eggleston, No. 05 Civ. 10446, 2006 WL 3230162, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 7, 2006)

(“Despite the different paths that led them to [Legal Permanent Resident] status, all class members

were victims of a ‘unitary course of conduct by a single system,’ thereby satisfying the commonality,

typicality and other relevant requirements[] of Rule 23.”). Moreover, Plaintiffs’ class definitionally

only includes those who were required to remove a religious head covering while in NYPD custody;

any class member will per se be declaring their belief that their religion mandates their head covering,

further obviating the need for the Court to inquire into each individual’s religious belief. DeOtte v.

Azar, 332 F.R.D. 188, 197 (N.D. Tex. 2019) (“Plaintiffs contend the contraceptive mandate violates

their sincerely held beliefs, and they have designed the class definitions so any employer or

individual who opts in will necessarily have contended the same.”).

Consequently, the proposed class is ascertainable and not overbroad.

B. Rule 23(a) Requirements

1.

Numerosity

Under Rule 23(a)(1), the class must be “so numerous that joinder of all members is

impracticable.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(1). Numerosity can be presumed if the class has at least forty

members. Robidoux v. Celani, 987 F.2d 931, 936 (2d Cir. 1993). Evidence of exact class size or

identity of class members is not required to satisfy the numerosity requirement. Id. at 935. Rather, a

district court must make a factual finding as to the approximate size of the class based on the

6

evidence presented, and then “apply the legal standard governing numerosity.” See In re IPO, 471 F.3d at 40.
According to the City’s records, Plaintiffs’ proposed class includes over 4,400 individuals for a four-year period alone. Freeman Decl. ¶ 26; Def. Mem. at 4 n.4. Defendant does not contest that Plaintiffs’ proposed class meets the numerosity requirement, instead arguing that a subset of hijabwearing women within Plaintiffs’ proposed class does not meet the requirement. Def. Mem. at 12– 13. Although the City’s records could invariably include head coverings misidentified as religious, three categories of presumptively religious head gear—hijabs, turbans, and yarmulkes/kippahs— appear in the City’s records over 2,000 times. Callaghan Decl. ¶ 13, ECF No. 136. Plaintiffs, therefore, have adequately established numerosity.
2. Commonality Rule 23(a)(2) requires that there be “questions of law or fact common to the class.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(2). Plaintiffs must “present evidence that a common factual nexus exists among the purported class.” See Lewis Tree Serv., Inc. v. Lucent Techs., Inc., 211 F.R.D. 228, 232 (S.D.N.Y. 2002). However, the commonality requirement is to be “liberally construed.” See Damassia v. Duane Reade, Inc., 250 F.R.D. 152, 156 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) (quoting Trief v. Dun & Bradstreet Corp., 144 F.R.D. 193, 198 (S.D.N.Y. 1992)); see also Lewis Tree, 211 F.R.D. at 231 (noting that “the commonality requirement of Rule 23(a)(2) is usually a minimal burden for a party to shoulder”). The commonality standard does “not mandate that the claims of the lead plaintiff be identical to those of all other plaintiffs.” Lapin v. Goldman Sachs & Co., 254 F.R.D. 168, 176 (S.D.N.Y. 2008). Rather, it “require[s] that plaintiffs identify some unifying thread among the members’ claims that warrants class treatment.” Damassia, 250 F.R.D. at 156 (quoting Bolanos v. Norwegian Cruise Lines Ltd., 212 F.R.D. 144, 153 (S.D.N.Y. 2002)) (alteration omitted). The commonality requirement
7

may be satisfied where plaintiffs’ various alleged injuries “derive from a unitary course of conduct by a single system.” See Marisol A. v. Giuliani, 126 F.3d 372, 377 (2d Cir. 1997).
The Court rejects Defendant’s contention that, because the class consists of members of different religions, it must evaluate each arrestee’s claim separately to establish liability. Def. Mem. at 14–16. Plaintiffs present one question that is common to all members of the proposed class: whether the Policy violates state and federal constitutions and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. Pl. Mem. at 1; Compl ¶ 69 (The class consists of individuals “who were (a) arrested by or in the custody of the NYPD; (b) required to take a post-arrest [b]ooking [p]hotograph while in any NYPD facility; and (3) forced to remove any religious head covering for that [b]ooking [p]hotograph pursuant to” the Policy). The Policy compels all individuals to remove religious headwear when sitting for a booking photograph. Interim Order 29. As a result, every member of the class will have the same claim because each member objects, due to their sincerelyheld religious beliefs, to some or all of the activity the Policy compels. See DeOtte, 332 F.R.D. at 197–99 (certifying a class consisting of individuals with a variety of religions who object to the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive mandate); Marisol A., 126 F.3d at 377.
Plaintiffs, therefore, have adequately established commonality. 3. Typicality
Rule 23(a)(3) requires that “the claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the claims or defenses of the class.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(3). As is well-recognized, “[t]he commonality and typicality requirements tend to merge into one another, so that similar considerations animate analysis of Rules 23(a)(2) and (3).” Marisol A., 126 F.3d at 376 (citing Gen. Tel. Co. of Sw. v. Falcon, 457 U.S. 147, 157 n.13 (1982)). The typicality requirement is satisfied “when each class member’s claim arises from the same course of events, and each class member makes similar legal arguments to prove the defendant’s liability.” In re Drexel Burnham Lambert
8

Grp., 960 F.2d 285, 291 (2d Cir. 1992). As with commonality, typicality is not defeated by “minor variations in the fact patterns underlying individual claims,” as long as the wrong is alleged to have occurred in the same general fashion. Robidoux, 987 F.2d at 936–37.
Given the discussion of commonality, above, and the fact that all class members, like the named Plaintiffs, have had to remove their religious head coverings in accordance with the Policy, the class members’ alleged injuries derive from a unitary course of conduct. Abdul-Malik v. Coombe, No. 96 Civ. 1021, 1996 WL 706914, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 6, 1996) (finding that a proposed class met typicality requirements despite variations in the class members’ religious practices); Brooklyn Ctr. for Indep. of the Disabled v. Bloomberg, 290 F.R.D. 409, 419 (S.D.N.Y. 2012) (“Where, as here, the alleged ‘injuries derive from a unitary course of conduct by a single system,’ typicality is generally found.” (quoting Marisol A., 126 F.3d at 377 (2d Cir. 1997))).
Plaintiffs, therefore, have also adequately established typicality. 4. Adequacy
Rule 23(a)(4) requires that “the representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(4). Adequacy of representation is evaluated in two ways: by looking to the qualifications of the plaintiffs’ counsel and by examining the interests of the named plaintiffs. See Baffa v. Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette Sec. Corp., 222 F.3d 52, 60 (2d Cir. 2000).
Defendant does not dispute adequacy of representation. See Def. Mem. Nor has the Court identified any basis upon which to question the qualifications and experience of Plaintiffs’ counsel. Similarly, the Court cannot identify any conflict of interest between Plaintiffs and other members of the proposed class.
Plaintiffs, therefore, have shown adequacy.
9

B. Rule 23(b)(3) Requirements A class action may be maintained if all four Rule 23(a) requirements are met, and the action qualifies under at least one of the subdivisions of Rule 23(b). Plaintiffs assert that certification is appropriate under Rule 23(b)(3). Pl. Mem. at 14. A class action may be certified under Rule 23(b)(3) if “the questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members, and that a class action is superior to other available methods for fairly and efficiently adjudicating the controversy.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3). “The Rule 23(b)(3) predominance inquiry tests whether proposed classes are sufficiently cohesive to warrant adjudication by representation.” Amchem Prods., Inc. v. Windsor, 521 U.S. 591, 623 (1997). “The predominance requirement is more demanding than the commonality requirement in Rule 23(a): Plaintiffs must show that the case is subject to generalized proof applicable to the class as a whole.” Espinoza v. 953 Assocs. LLC, 280 F.R.D. 113, 125 (S.D.N.Y. 2011) (citation omitted). “[A] court examining predominance must assess (1) the elements of the claims and defenses to be litigated, and (2) whether generalized evidence could be offered to prove those elements on a classwide basis or whether individualized proof will be needed to establish each class member’s entitlement to relief.” Johnson v. Nextel Commc’ns Inc., 780 F.3d 128, 138 (2d Cir. 2015) (quotation marks and citation omitted). Additionally, the presence of uninjured class members does not preclude a finding of predominance. In re Rail Freight Fuel Surcharge Antitrust Litig., 292 F. Supp. 3d 14, 135 (D.D.C. 2017) (“Several district court judges in the Second Circuit also have found Rule 23(b)(3) predominance satisfied despite the presence of uninjured class members at the class certification stage.”), aff’d sub nom. In re Rail Freight Fuel Surcharge Antitrust Litig. - MDL No. 1869, 934 F.3d 619 (D.C. Cir. 2019). “Common issues—such as liability—may be certified, consistent with Rule 23, even where other issues—such as damages—do not lend themselves to classwide proof.” Johnson, 780 F.3d. at
10

138 (citing Augustin v. Jablonsky (In re Nassau County Strip Search Cases), 461 F.3d 219, 227 (2d Cir. 2006)). “When one or more of the central issues in the action are common to the class and can be said to predominate, the action may be considered proper under Rule 23(b)(3), even though other important matters will have to be tried separately, such as damages or some affirmative defenses peculiar to some individual class members.” Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Bouaphakeo, 136 S.Ct. 1036, 1045 (2016) (quotation marks and citation omitted).
Again, the Court rejects Defendant’s argument that the Court will have to undertake individualized determinations into each proposed class member’s religious beliefs. The proposed class members are unified by a common legal theory and by common facts: they all argue that the Policy is unconstitutional and that each was allegedly subjected to removing their religious headgear in violation of their sincerely-held religious beliefs. Although proposed class members have differing religious beliefs, these minor factual variations do not preclude certification because they do not predominate. See McBean v. City of New York, 228 F.R.D. 487, 502–3 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) (certifying a class under Rule 23(b)(3) where all proposed class members were subject to a blanket strip search policy mandating strip searches for every post-arraignment misdemeanor arrestee). Where the field of individual defenses as to liability is considerably limited, as here, predominance of the central legal and factual issues common to all proposed class members is evident. Id.
As a final requirement, Plaintiffs must show that a “class action is superior to other available methods for fairly and effectively adjudicating the controversy.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3). “Courts routinely hold that a class action is superior where . . . potential class members are aggrieved by the same policies [and] the damages suffered are small relative to the expense and burden of individual litigation.” Fonseca v. Dircksen & Talleyrand Inc., 13 Civ. 5124, 2015 WL 5813382, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 28, 2015).
11

Defendant does not dispute that a class action would be superior. See Def. Mem. Accordingly, the Court concludes that a class action is the most efficient means of resolving these claims.
Plaintiffs, therefore, have met the requirements of Rule 23(b)(3). CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated above, Plaintiffs’ motion to certify class is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 130. SO ORDERED. Dated: February 16, 2021 New York, New York
12

 
 Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 1 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 2 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 3 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 4 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 5 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 6 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 7 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 8 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 9 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 10 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 11 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 12 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 13 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 14 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 15 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 16 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 17 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 18 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 19 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 20 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 21 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 22 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 23 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 24 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 25 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 26 of 27

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 1 Filed 03/16/18 Page 27 of 27

 
 Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 144 Filed 09/30/20 Page 1 of 2

Case 1:18-cv-02334-AT-KHP Document 144 Filed 09/30/20 Page 2 of 2 The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 20. SO ORDERED. Dated: September 29, 2020 New York, New York
2