Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cr-00149/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cr-00149-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Imran Husain
Defendant
USA
Plaintiff

Document Text:

Stipulation and [PROPOSED] Order to Exclude Time

Case No. CR 14-00149 RS

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

MELINDA HAAG (CABN 132612)

United States Attorney

J. DOUGLAS WILSON (DCBN 812411)

Chief, Criminal Division

BENJAMIN KINGSLEY (NYBN 4758389)

Assistant United States Attorney

450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055

San Francisco, California 94102-3495

Telephone: (415) 436-6937

Fax: (415) 436-7234

Benjamin.Kingsley@usdoj.gov

Attorneys for the United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

IMRAN HUSAIN, 

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO: CR 14-00149 RS

STIPULATION TO EXCLUDE TIME AND 

[PROPOSED] ORDER

The parties request that the time between August 12, 2014 and September 16, 2014 be excluded 

under the Speedy Trial Act pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B). Defense counsel needs time 

to continue to review the evidence in the case. Excluding time until the next appearance on September 

16, 2014 will allow for the effective preparation of counsel. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). 

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Dated: August 14, 2014 /s/ ___

BENJAMIN KINGSLEY

Assistant United States Attorney

Dated: August 14, 2014 /s/ ___

VICTOR SHERMAN

GEORGE NEWHOUSE

Counsel for Defendant Imran Husain

Case 3:14-cr-00149-RS Document 17 Filed 08/15/14 Page 1 of 2
Stipulation and [PROPOSED] Order to Exclude Time

Case No. CR 14-00149 RS

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

[PROPOSED] ORDER

The Court finds that the exclusion of the period from August 12, 2014 and September 16, 2014 

from the time limits applicable under 18 U.S.C. § 3161, is warranted; that the ends of justice served by 

the continuance outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in the prompt disposition of this 

criminal case; and that the failure to grant the requested exclusion of time would deny counsel for the 

defendant and for the government the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation and of 

counsel, taking into account the exercise of due diligence, and would result in a miscarriage of justice. 

See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: ___________________ ___________________________

HON. RICHARD SEEBORG

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

8/15/14

Case 3:14-cr-00149-RS Document 17 Filed 08/15/14 Page 2 of 2