Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00062/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00062-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 895
Nature of Suit: Freedom of Information Act of 1974
Cause of Action: 05:552 Freedom of Information Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LION RAISINS, INC., )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) 

)

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF )

AGRICULTURE, )

)

Defendant. )

 )

1:05-cv-00062-REC-SMS

SCHEDULING CONFERENCE ORDER

Cross-Motions for Summary

Judgment Filing Deadline:

7/21/05

Responses Filing Deadline:

8/4/05

Reply Briefs Filing Deadline:

8/11/05 

Summary Judgment Motion(s)

Hearing Date:

8/29/05, 1:30pm, Ctrm. 1/REC

1. Date of Scheduling Conference:

June 27, 2005.

2. Appearances of Counsel:

Brian C. Leighton, Esq., appeared on behalf of

plaintiffs.

Assistant United States Attorney Kristi C. Kapetan

appeared on behalf of defendants.

//

/

Case 1:05-cv-00062-OWW -SMS Document 15 Filed 06/29/05 Page 1 of 6
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

3. The Pleadings:

A. Summary of the Pleadings.

Plaintiff brings this action for declaratory and

injunction relief under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”).

Plaintiff claims that defendant is withholding documents that it

needs to defend itself in an action instituted by defendant to

debar plaintiff from all USDA inspections. The USDA instituted

debarment proceedings against plaintiff for allegedly altering USDA

certificates. Plaintiff contends that it has not been provided

with “voided certificates” or “worksheets” in the underlying

administrative proceeding defendant is conducting as part of the

debarment proceeding.

On May 13, 2004, plaintiff submitted an official

FOIA request to defendant for any and all Forms FV-146

(certificates of quality and condition) which had been voided at

Lion Raisins, Inc., during the period of January 1995 to December

2000. Defendant is withholding the documents pursuant to 5 U.S.C.

§ 522(b)(7)(A) because the documents are evidence in the ongoing

investigation of plaintiff. Plaintiff appealed and the decision to

withhold these documents was reversed. By letter dated February

14, 2005, 534 documents representing the USDA Certificates of

Quality and Condition (form FV-146) which were voided by USDA

personnel at Lion Raisins, Inc., between August 1, 1995 and

December 31, 2000, were sent to plaintiff.

By letter dated May 13, 2004, plaintiff also

requested the Certificate of Quality and Condition for Raisins

Worksheets issued or prepared by defendant for product inspected at

Lion Raisins, Inc., during the period of January 1995 to December

Case 1:05-cv-00062-OWW -SMS Document 15 Filed 06/29/05 Page 2 of 6
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

2000. Defendant refused to release the records, and that refusal

was upheld on appeal. Defendant has not released those records.

B. Orders Re: Amendment of Pleadings.

No amendments are proposed at this time.

4. Factual Summary:

A. Admitted Facts which are deemed proven without 

further proceedings.

(1) Venue

(2) Plaintiff has exhausted its administrative

remedies with respect to the documents sought.

B. Contested Facts.

(1) All other facts.

5. Legal Issues:

A. Uncontested.

(1) Venue

B. Contested.

(1) All other legal issues.

6. Discovery Plan and Cut-Off Dates:

This case must be decided on the administrative record

and, therefore, no discovery is anticipated.

7. Pre-Trial Motion Schedule:

The parties agree to file cross-motions for summary

judgment by July 21, 2005; responses to said motions due by August

4, 2005; reply briefs by August 11, 2005; and, a hearing on August

29, 2005 at 1:30 p.m. in Courtroom No. 1 before the Honorable

Robert E. Coyle, Senior United States District Judge.

//

/

Case 1:05-cv-00062-OWW -SMS Document 15 Filed 06/29/05 Page 3 of 6
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4

8. Related Matters Pending:

Lion Bros v. USDA

1:05-cv-00292-REC-SMS

Lion Raisins v. USDA

1:05-cv-00640-REC-SMS

9. Compliance with Federal Procedure:

The Court requires compliance with the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of Practice for the Eastern

District of California. To aid the Court in the efficient

administration of this case, all counsel are expected to

familiarize themselves with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

and the Local Rules of Practice for the Eastern District of

California, and to keep abreast of any amendments thereto. The

Court must insist upon compliance with these Rules if it is to

efficiently handle its increasing caseload. Sanctions will be

imposed for failure to follow the Rules as provided in both the

Fed.R.Civ.P. and the Local Rules.

10. Compliance with Electronic Filing Requirement:

On January 3, 2005, the United States District Court for

the Eastern District of California became an electronic case

management/filing district (CM/ECF). Unless excused by the Court,

or by Local Rule, attorneys shall file all documents electronically

as of January 3, 2005 in all actions pending before the court.

While Pro Se Litigants are exempt from this requirement, the court

will scan in all documents filed by pro se litigants, and the

official court record in all cases will be electronic. Attorneys

are required to file electronically in pro se cases. More

information regarding the Court’s implementation of CM/ECF can be

found on the court’s web site at www.caed.uscourts.gov, including

Case 1:05-cv-00062-OWW -SMS Document 15 Filed 06/29/05 Page 4 of 6
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

5

the Court’s Amended Local Rules effective January 3, 2005, the

Court’s CM/ECF Final Procedures, and the Court’s CM/ECF User’s

Manual.

While the Clerk's Office will not refuse to file a

proffered paper document, the Clerk's Office will scan it and, if

improperly filed, notify the Court that the document was filed in

an improper format. An order to show cause (OSC) may be issued in

appropriate cases regarding an attorney's disregard for the

requirement to utilize electronic filing, or other violations of

these electronic filing procedures. See L.R. 11-110, L.R.

5-133(d)(3).

If counsel has not already done so, counsel must register

for CM/ECF as soon as possible. On-line registration is available

at www.caed.uscourts.gov. Once registered, counsel will receive a

login and password in approximately one (1) week. Counsel must be

registered to file documents on-line. See L.R. 5-135(g). Counsel

are responsible for knowing the rules governing electronic filing

in the Eastern District. Please review the Court’s Local Rules

effective January 3, 2005, available on the Court’s web site.

11. Effect of this Order:

The foregoing Order represents the best estimate of the

Court and counsel as to the agenda most suitable to bring this case

to resolution. If the parties determine at any time that the

schedule outlined in this Order cannot be met, counsel are ordered

to notify the Court immediately so that adjustments may be made,

either by stipulation or by subsequent status conference.

Stipulations extending the deadlines contained herein

will not be considered unless they are accompanied by affidavits or

Case 1:05-cv-00062-OWW -SMS Document 15 Filed 06/29/05 Page 5 of 6
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

6

declarations and, where appropriate, attached exhibits which

establish good cause for granting the relief requested.

FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS ORDER SHALL RESULT IN THE

IMPOSITION OF SANCTIONS.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 28, 2005 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00062-OWW -SMS Document 15 Filed 06/29/05 Page 6 of 6