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

Chief Judge Marsha J. Pechman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

Plaintiff, ) CR06-157 MJP

)

v. )

) [PROPOSED]

HENRY C. ROSENAU, ) ORDER CONTINUING

) TRIAL

)

Defendant. )

_________________________________)

This matter having come on before the undersigned Court on motion of the

Government for a continuance of the trial date,

Having considered the files and records herein, the Government's Motion and facts

contained therein,

and Title 18 United States Section 3161(h) which set forth periods of excludable

time, including:

(3)(A) Any period of delay resulting from the absence of unavailability of

. . . an essential witness.

. . .

(7)(A) Any period of delay resulting from a continuance granted

. . . or at the request of the attorney for the Government, if the judge

granted such continuance on the basis of his findings that the ends of justice

served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the

defendant in a speedy trial. No such period of delay resulting from a

continuance granted by the court in accordance with this paragraph shall be

excludable under this subsection unless the court sets forth, in the record of

the case, either orally or in writing, its reasons for finding that the ends of

justice served by the granting of such continuance outweigh the best

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

Proposed Order Continuing Trial

United States v. Rosenau - 1

CR06-157MJP

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

700 Stewart Street, Suite 5220

Seattle, Washington 98101-1271

(206) 553-7970

Case 2:06-cr-00157-MJP Document 54-1 Filed 10/31/11 Page 1 of 3
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

The Court further considered Title 18 USC § 3161, subsection (7)(B) listing

non-exclusive factors which the Court may consider when determining whether to grant

the requested continuance, including:

(i) Whether the failure to grant such a continuance in the

proceeding would be likely to make a continuation of such

proceeding impossible, or result in a miscarriage of justice.

. . .

(iv) Whether the failure to grant such a continuance in a case which,

taken as a whole, is not so unusual or so complex as to fall within

clause (ii), . . . would deny . . . the attorney for the Government

the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into

account the exercise of due diligence.

Another period of time appropriately excluded is:

(8) Any period of delay, not to exceed one year, ordered by a district

court upon an application of a party and a finding by a preponderance of

the evidence that an official request, as defined by section 3292 of this title,

has been made for evidence of any such offense and that it reasonably

appears, or reasonably appeared at the time the request was made, that such

evidence is, or was, in such foreign country.

Now therefore, the Court finds:

Essential witnesses are unavailable to testify in the trial as currently scheduled.

The unavailability of several essential government witnesses is sudden, unexpected, and

the result of defendant's deliberate actions.

It is foreseeable that the essential witnesses will be made available within a

reasonable time period, as set forth in Title 18, United States Code, Sections 3161(8) and

3292, through the use of additional official requests, including through employment of the

Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty.

The Government, through the Office of International Affairs, Department of

Justice; the United States Attorneys Office, Western District of Washington; the

Homeland Security Investigations Office of Department of Homeland Security; and the

Homeland Security Attache, United States Consulate, Vancouver, British Columbia,

Proposed Order Continuing Trial

United States v. Rosenau - 2

CR06-157MJP

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

700 Stewart Street, Suite 5220

Seattle, Washington 98101-1271

(206) 553-7970

Case 2:06-cr-00157-MJP Document 54-1 Filed 10/31/11 Page 2 of 3
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

Canada, made timely official requests to appropriate Canadian authorities with criminal

law enforcement responsibility. Those official requests for testimony, records and

evidence appeared to be legally sufficient to produce the necessary testimony and

evidence until the defendant's actions of October 20, 2011 and October 25, 2011. The

defendant's actions were undertaken solely to thwart the production of witnesses and

evidence.

Now, therefore, the Court grants the Government's Emergency Motion for a

Continuance of the Trial Date. it is reasonable and necessary to continue the trial date in

this matter. The ends of justice and the interests of the public are served by the requested

continuance.

The trial was scheduled for November 7, 2011. The trial will be continued until

_________________________ and the time between November 7, 2011 and

_____________ is excludable under the Speedy Trial Act.

Dated this ______ day of __________________, 2011.

MARSHA J. PECHMAN

Chief Judge, United States District Court

Proposed Order Continuing Trial

United States v. Rosenau - 3

CR06-157MJP

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

700 Stewart Street, Suite 5220

Seattle, Washington 98101-1271

(206) 553-7970

Case 2:06-cr-00157-MJP Document 54-1 Filed 10/31/11 Page 3 of 3