Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cr-00130/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cr-00130-6/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Esam Ali
Defendant
Fawaz Ali
Defendant
USA
Plaintiff

Document Text:

1 STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME 

PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL 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 

PHILLIP A. TALBERT 

United States Attorney 

JEFFREY A. SPIVAK 

Assistant United States Attorney 

2500 Tulare Street, Suite 4401 

Fresno, CA 93721 

Telephone: (559) 497-4000 

Facsimile: (559) 497-4099 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

United States of America 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

Esam ALI (1), and 

Fawaz ALI (2), 

 Defendants. 

CASE NO. 1:20-CR-00130-JLT-SKO 

STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE 

TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; 

ORDER 

DATE: June 29, 2022 

TIME: 1:00 p.m. 

COURT: Hon. Shiela K. Oberto 

This case is set for status conference on June 29, 2022. As set forth below, the parties now 

move, by stipulation, to continue the status conference to November 16, 2022, and to exclude the time 

period between June 29, 2022 and November 16, 2022 under the Speedy Trial Act. 

STIPULATION 

Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendants, by and 

through defendants’ counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 

1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on June 29, 2022. 

2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until June 29, 

2022, and to exclude time between June 29, 2022, and November 16, 2022, under Local Code T4. 

3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following: 

a) In January 2022, the undersigned government counsel substituted into this case. 

b) The government has represented that the discovery associated with this case is 

Case 1:20-cr-00130-JLT-SKO Document 35 Filed 06/22/22 Page 1 of 3
 

2 STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME 

PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL 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 

voluminous and includes many thousands of hours of wiretap calls, hundreds of hours of video, 

hundreds of investigative reports, hundreds of pictures, and extensive other evidence. This case 

was a multi-agency wiretap investigation that lasted nearly a year. All of this discovery has been 

either produced directly to counsel and/or made available for inspection and copying. 

c) Counsel for defendant desires additional time consult with his/her client, to 

review the current charges, to conduct further investigation and research related to the charges, to 

review discovery, to discuss potential resolution with government counsel, to evaluate potential 

pretrial motions. The COVID-19 pandemic has and continues to make certain tasks, such as 

client meetings, meetings with the government, and case investigation more difficult and more 

time consuming. 

d) Counsel for defendant believes that failure to grant the above-requested 

continuance would deny him/her the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking 

into account the exercise of due diligence. 

e) The government does not object to the continuance. 

f) Based on the above-stated findings, the ends of justice served by continuing the 

case as requested outweigh the interest of the public and the defendant in a trial within the 

original date prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act. 

g) For the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161, 

et seq., within which trial must commence, the time period of June 29, 2022 to November 16, 

2022, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 3161(h)(7)(A), B(iv) [Local Code 

T4] because it results from a continuance granted by the Court at defendant’s request on the basis 

of the Court’s finding that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best 

interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

Case 1:20-cr-00130-JLT-SKO Document 35 Filed 06/22/22 Page 2 of 3
 

3 STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME 

PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL 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 

4. Nothing in this stipulation and order shall preclude a finding that other provisions of the 

Speedy Trial Act dictate that additional time periods are excludable from the period within which a trial 

must commence. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

Dated: June 21, 2022 PHILLIP A. TALBERT 

United States Attorney 

/s/ JEFFREY A. SPIVAK

 JEFFREY A. SPIVAK

Assistant United States Attorney 

Dated: June 21, 2022 /s/ Carol Moses 

Carol Moses 

Counsel for Defendant 

Esam ALI (1) 

Dated: June 21, 2022 /s/ David Balakian

David Balakian 

Counsel for Defendant 

Fawaz ALI (2) 

ORDER 

The parties shall be prepared to select a mutually agreeable trial date at the next status 

conference. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: 

 HON. SHEILA K. OBERTO 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

6/22/2022

Case 1:20-cr-00130-JLT-SKO Document 35 Filed 06/22/22 Page 3 of 3