Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_14-cv-00958/USCOURTS-casd-3_14-cv-00958-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 895
Nature of Suit: Freedom of Information Act of 1974
Cause of Action: 05:0552fi 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CONSTANTINO CANELOS RODRIGUEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND DRUG

ENFORCEMENT AGENCY

Defendants.

 

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 14CV958-W (BLM)

ORDER FOLLOWING EARLY

NEUTRAL EVALUATION

CONFERENCE

On July 2, 2014, the Court held a telephonic Early Neutral Evaluation Conference

(ENE) in the above-entitled action. Settlement of the case could not be reached during the

ENE and at the conclusion of the ENE, the Court discussed with counsel the issues

presented in this litigation and the possible procedures for resolving the relevant issues. 

Counsel reached agreement regarding the appropriate procedure and, based upon the

parties’ agreement and finding good cause, the Court enters the following orders:

(1) On or before July 11, 2014, the parties will file a joint motion to amend the

complaint to add the Federal Bureau of Investigation as a defendant;

(2) At 9:00 a.m. on Monday, August 11, 2014, the Court will conduct a telephonic

case management conference to discuss the status of the case against the FBI. The Court

will initiate the conference call;

14CV958-W(BLM)

Case 3:14-cv-00958-W-BLM Document 8 Filed 07/07/14 Page 1 of 2
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) On or before August 15, 2014, Defendant will provide to Plaintiff an accounting

regarding the $1200 paid by Plaintiff to the Drug Enforcement Administration to cover the

cost of the FOIA document search requested by Plaintiff; 

(4) On or before October 3, 2014, Defendant will provide to Plaintiff a “Vaughn”

declaration and index “identifying the documents withheld [by the DEA], the FOIA

exemptions claimed, and a particularized explanation of why each document falls within the

claimed exemption.” Lion Raisins v. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 354 F.3d 1072, 1082 (9th Cir.

2004) (citing Wiener v. F.B.I., 943 F.2d 972, 977 (9th Cir. 1991)).

(5) After the production of the DEA “Vaughn” declaration and index, the attorneys

for both parties will meet and confer in an effort to resolve any remaining disputes between

the parties;

(6) At 9:00 a.m. on November 3, 2014, the Court will conduct a telephonic case

management conference to discuss the “Vaughn” declaration and index and the status of

the litigation as to the DEA’s FOIA response. The Court will initiate the conference call. If

unresolved issues remain, the parties should anticipate that the Court will require motions

for summary judgment to be filed within 30 days; and

(7) The parties agree that discovery, including initial disclosures, is not appropriate

in this FOIA dispute so the Court declines to set any such dates.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: July 7, 2014

BARBARA L. MAJOR

United States Magistrate Judge

-2- 14CV958-W(BLM)

Case 3:14-cv-00958-W-BLM Document 8 Filed 07/07/14 Page 2 of 2