Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00180/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00180-14/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights 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

McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

BRIAN W. ENOS

Assistant United States Attorney

United States Courthouse

2500 Tulare Street, Suite 4401

Fresno, California 93721

Telephone: (559) 497-4000

Facsimile: (559) 497-4099

Attorneys for Defendants Federal Bureau of Investigation, Drug Enforcement Administration, 

United States Marshals Service and Department of Justice 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL SCHULZE, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

FEDERAL BUREAU OF )

INVESTIGATION, DRUG )

ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION, )

UNITED STATES MARSHALS )

SERVICE and DEPARTMENT OF )

JUSTICE, )

Defendants. )

)

 )

1:05-cv-00180-AWI-NEW(WMW)

DEFENDANTS FOURTH EX PARTE

APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF

TIME BY WHICH TO FILE

DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS

ORDER

[Local Rule 6-144(c)]

Pursuant to Local Rule 6-144 , defendants Federal Bureau of Investigation, Drug

Enforcement Administration, United States Marshals Service and Department of Justice

(“defendants”) request by way of this ex parte application a seven-day extension of time by

which all parties must file dispositive motions in this case. The present dispositive motion

deadline is July 6, 2007. Defendants seek to extend this deadline until July 13, 2007, and base

this application on good cause. Defendants explain as follows:

1. Plaintiff Michael Schulze brings FOIA and Privacy Act claims against defendants

while incarcerated within the Bureau of Prisons system. (Declaration of Brian W. Enos (“Enos

Decl.”), para. 2). Defendants request a seven-day extension of the parties’ deadline by which to

file their dispositive motions in this case, or from July 6, 7002 until July 13, 2007. Defendants

Case 1:05-cv-00180-AWI-EPG Document 53 Filed 07/10/07 Page 1 of 7
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

understand that this is their fourth ex parte application filed in this case, and the undersigned

apologizes to the court for its being filed on the date of this case’s present dispositive motion

filing deadline. (Enos Decl., para. 3). As explained below, however, this application is based on

good cause. (Id., at paras. 3-8).

2. By way of brief background, this action’s present dispositive motion filing

deadline is today, July 6, 2007. (Doc. 50). Until approximately 10:00 a.m. this morning, the

undersigned anticipated filing defendants’ summary judgment motion today. (Enos Decl., para. 4;

Declaration of Peggy Bellando (“Bellando Decl.”), para. 7). Because this matter comprises a

fact-intensive FOIA case, defendants’ brief is presently being supported by four declarations and

three Vaughn indices collectively spanning hundreds of pages. (Ibid.)

3. The undersigned litigation counsel possesses signed declarations and attendant

Vaughn indices from representatives of defendants DEA and USMS, and they have been

incorporated into defendants’ draft moving papers. (Enos Decl., para. 5). He also received a

lengthy (approximately 400 pages) a draft declaration/Vaughn index from defendant FBI this

past Tuesday, which has likewise been incorporated into defendants’ draft moving papers. (Ibid.) 

He learned this morning from the FBI, however, that it would be unable to finalize, proofread

and sign its declaration/Vaughn declaration by today. (Ibid; Declaration of Peggy Bellando

(“Bellando Decl.”), para. 7). Prior to this morning, the undersigned understood from the FBI was

that it would be able to send .pdf copies of its finalized documents to him in time to file

defendants’ dispositive motion today. (Enos Decl., para. 5) The undersigned understands now

that among the reasons for the FBI’s short delay was its recently receiving documents from the

USMS about this case that it must analyze, process and address in defendants’ moving papers.

(Ibid.)

4. Defendants at this time request an additional one week by which to file dispositive

motions in this case, and base their request on good cause. (Enos Decl., paras. 3-8). The FBI

believes it will be able to deliver a signed declaration, exhibits and Vaughn index in time to

allow defendants to file their moving papers next week. (Enos Decl., para. 6).

Case 1:05-cv-00180-AWI-EPG Document 53 Filed 07/10/07 Page 2 of 7
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

///

5. Plaintiff is presently in transit between USP facilities. (Enos Decl., para. 7). As

such, plaintiff is not prejudiced by this request, in that he is presently not receiving mail. (Ibid.)

6. A timely stipulation extending time cannot be reasonably obtained, in that

plaintiff, acting pro se, is presently incarcerated and in transit between USP facilities within the

State of Hawaii. (Enos Decl., para. 8). 

7. The FBI provides the following additional good cause in support of this

application:

Strains on the FBI’s FOIA Resources

a. Two significant factors have impacted on the FBI’s ability to meet the current

litigation deadline: (a) several urgent and competing litigation deadlines, and (b) the

physical relocation of a portion of the Section’s personnel and resources from FBIHQ to

the interim facility in Frederick County, Virginia, both of which will be discussed in

further detail below. (Bellando Decl., para. 8).

Pending FOIA Litigations

b. First, the FBI’s Record/Information Dissemination Section (“RIDS”) has been

strained by substantial litigation demands. (Bellando Decl., para. 9). These litigation

demands have, in part, been responsible for the FBI’s delay in meeting the deadline

earlier represented to its counsel. (Ibid.) At the present time, the FBI is involved in

approximately 100 pending lawsuits in various federal courts throughout the United

States. (Ibid.) These lawsuits have required a substantial time commitment by RIDS

personnel, including the Freedom of Information-Privacy Acts Litigation Support Unit

(“FOIPA LSU”) responsible for preparing the Vaughn declaration in this litigation. (Ibid.) 

Recently, the FBI has been judicially pressed to step up its processing of certain FOIA

requests in response to district court orders and court action, further hampering its efforts

to meet previously set deadlines for other pending FOIA requests. (Ibid.) Three recent

lawsuits initiated by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (“EFF”) in the U.S. District Court

Case 1:05-cv-00180-AWI-EPG Document 53 Filed 07/10/07 Page 3 of 7
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

for the District of Columbia have strained RIDS resources. (Ibid.) For example, in one

EFF FOIA litigation, which seeks access to National Security Letters and related material,

Judge John Bates has ordered the FBI to process 2,500 pages every thirty days until all

responsive documents have been reviewed (which currently the FBI estimates will exceed

100,000 pages). (Ibid.) In the FBI’s largest FOIA litigation in its history, Rosenfeld v.

DOJ (N.D. Cal.), the FBI has been ordered to conduct hand searches of its

Counterintelligence Program (“COINTELPRO”) files for numerous subjects, and to open

thirteen (13) new FOIA requests on individual subjects. (Ibid.) In order to comply with

these demands, the FBI has had to realign its personnel resources and has made a

substantial commitment of resources to address all of these court-ordered issues. (Ibid.) In

addition, RIDS personnel are actively responding to FOIA/Privacy Act requests in several

other pending district court litigations, which total tens of thousand of pages. (Ibid.)

RMD Relocation to Frederick County, Virginia

c. The decision to locate the permanent CRC site in Frederick County, Virginia,

is currently pending with the U.S. General Services Administration. (Bellando Decl.,

para. 10). The FBI has begun the temporary relocation of Records Management Division

(“RMD”) sections to interim sites in Frederick County, Virginia, and will continue with a

full relocation of its workforce once the permanent CRC is built and ready for occupancy,

sometime around the year 2010. (Ibid.) The interim sites are approximately 90 miles out

of the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area – about a 11⁄2-hour drive from FBIHQ. (Ibid.)

d. RIDS began relocation of its operations in February 2006 by establishing an

advance team to prepare for the eventual relocation of RIDS in incremental stages.

(Bellando Decl., para. 11). During the summer of 2006, RIDS began the first phase by

relocating five and one half of its ten FBIHQ unit functions to an interim site, specifically

half of the Service Request Unit, and all of Work Process Unit One, Work Process Unit

Two, FOIPA Unit One, FOIPA Unit Two, and Classification Unit Two. (Ibid.) To ensure

continuing RIDS operations during the move, half of the Service Request Unit function

Case 1:05-cv-00180-AWI-EPG Document 53 Filed 07/10/07 Page 4 of 7
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

and the functions of FOIPA Unit Three, Classification Unit One, Classification Unit

Three, and the Litigation Support Unit remain at FBIHQ. (Ibid.) These FBIHQ units, with

a total of approximately 85 employees currently on board, consist of the most senior and

experienced RIDS employees. (Ibid.)

e. As evidenced by the FBI’s 2006 FOIA/Privacy Act statistics, RIDS is making

every effort to minimize disruption to operations during this transition period. (Bellando

Decl., para. 12). However, disruption to operations has been inevitable, and has caused a

ripple effect throughout RIDS, impacting both litigation and non-litigation workloads.

(Ibid.) This has been made all the more challenging as many employees have opted not to

transfer with their unit function, opting to either retire or find other jobs rather than

relocate to Frederick County, Virginia. (Ibid.) Unfortunately, many of these employees

were among the most senior and experienced in their area of expertise. (Ibid.) Since RMD

announced its off-site relocation plans, a total of approximately 58 former RIDS

employees have either resigned, retired, or found other jobs in the Washington, D. C.

Metropolitan area, rather than relocate with their unit. (Ibid.) To date, a total of

approximately 64 RIDS employees from FBIHQ relocated with their unit to Frederick

County, Virginia.(Ibid.)

f. The FBI is engaged in aggressive and intense recruitment and hiring efforts in

the Frederick County, Virginia area. (Bellando Decl., para. 13). In response to several

recent postings for new hires, RIDS selected 333 individuals for interviews in June and

November of 2005 and in January, February, March, August, October, and December of

2006, collectively. (Ibid.) Of the 333 selected for interview, 82 candidates advised they

were no longer interested prior to interview; of the remaining 251 candidates interviewed,

94 either declined the initial offer of conditional employment following their interview or

were disqualified during their background investigation; approximately 35 employees

have come on board; and the remaining are still pending in the background process.

(Ibid.) Past experience has shown that approximately 33% of those in FBI background

Case 1:05-cv-00180-AWI-EPG Document 53 Filed 07/10/07 Page 5 of 7
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

investigations successfully complete the hiring process. (Ibid.) With approximately 203

employees currently on the rolls, RIDS is 108 positions under its funded staffing level of

311 employees. (Ibid.) In addition, in light of the continuing resolution pursuant to which

much of the federal government is operating, and which has resulted in a hiring freeze

until further notice, RMD may not be able to hire any new support employees in the

immediate future. (Ibid.) The new RIDS employees who have less than one year of

experience are in various stages of professional development, but none are yet operating

as experienced employees. (Ibid.) It takes an average of three years to adequately train a

new employee in the FOIA/PA process to be able to work independently in a productive,

efficient, and effective manner. (Ibid.) Accordingly, at this time RIDS has only a limited

number of experienced employees who are addressing FOIA/Privacy Act matters which

are in litigation. (Ibid.)

The Two Referrals of FBI Documents by USMS

g. In addition, the FBI plans to also incorporate the two sets of documents –

totaling approximately 110 pages – referred to it by USMS as part of its narrative Vaughn

declaration. (Bellando Decl., para. 14). Although one USMS referral was sent to the FBI

in January 2007, the second one was received by the FBI on June 27, 2007. (Ibid.) The

requested additional time will permit the FBI to incorporate fully the 110-page USMS

referral into its narrative Vaughn declaration, and thereby enable the FBI to move for full

summary judgment by July 13, 2007. (Ibid.) Despite its continued efforts, the FBI has

been unable to comply fully with today’s Court deadline. However, the FBI anticipates

that it will complete its narrative Vaughn declaration in support of its dispositive motion

no later than July 13, 2007. (Bellando Decl., para. 15).

8. In light of the foregoing, defendants respectfully request the court to extend the

parties’ deadline by which to file dispositive motions in this case by 7 days, or from July 6, 2007

through July 13, 2007. Beforehand, defendants are unable to sign off on all necessary

///

Case 1:05-cv-00180-AWI-EPG Document 53 Filed 07/10/07 Page 6 of 7
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

7

 declarations to be filed in support of their pending dispositive motion. (Enos Decl., para. 9).

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: July 6, 2007 McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

By: /s/ Brian W. Enos________

BRIAN W. ENOS

Assistant U.S. Attorney

Attorneys for defendants

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 9, 2007 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00180-AWI-EPG Document 53 Filed 07/10/07 Page 7 of 7