1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

ROBERT HOPKINS, III,

Plaintiff,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE,

Defendant.

No. 3:22-CV-00706-E

DECISION REQUESTED BY 

JUNE 9, 2023

[AMENDED] JOINT RENEWED MOTION FOR EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION

The parties hereby respectfully request that the Court resolve their scheduling motions

(ECF Nos. 13, 15, and 17) on an expedited basis, with a decision requested by this Friday, June 

9, 2023. The parties are filing this renewed request out of an abundance of caution, given the fact 

that several of the deadlines in Judge Cummings’s original scheduling order (ECF No. 12) are 

impending and that the case was only recently reassigned to the Court.

This case involves a challenge by a former Air Force Captain, who seeks to publish 

several manuscripts, to the pre-publication review process administered by Defendant. See 

Complaint, ECF No. 1. The parties have sought to stay or amend various deadlines in the

scheduling order previously entered by Judge Cummings in this matter. Specifically,

• Plaintiff has filed a Motion for Status Conference, which Defendants do 

not oppose if the Court would find it helpful. See ECF No. 13.

• Plaintiff has also filed a Motion to Stay Future Deadlines, in which he 

asks the Court to stay the deadlines in the original scheduling order for 

motions for summary judgment, the completion of mediation, the 

completion of discovery, motions in limine, and trial, pending the 

resolution of his Motion for Status Conference and a forthcoming motion 

to compel Defendant to process his counsel for access to classified 

information and provide access if the processing does not identify counsel 

as a security risk. See ECF No. 15.

Case 3:22-cv-00706-E Document 23 Filed 06/08/23 Page 1 of 4 PageID 437
2 

• Defendant has filed a Cross-Motion to Amend Scheduling Order, which 

asks the Court to stay all discovery, mediation, and other deadlines, 

including any deadline to respond to Plaintiff’s forthcoming motion to 

compel, pending the resolution of Defendant’s forthcoming motion for 

summary judgment. Defendant has also asked the Court to extend the 

deadline for motions for summary judgment to August 11, 2023. See ECF 

No. 17.

The core dispute between the parties is whether to proceed, as Plaintiff requests, by first 

resolving whether Plaintiff’s counsel is entitled to be processed for access to classified 

information, and then to be provided access to classified information if the processing does not 

identify him as a security risk; or, as Defendant requests, by first determining whether the case 

can be resolved by summary judgment filings and an ex parte, in camera affidavit explaining the 

basis for the government’s redactions to Plaintiff’s manuscripts, before considering whether to 

order Defendant to process Plaintiff’s counsel for access to classified information, to order 

Defendant to provide counsel with access to classified information if processing does not 

identify him as a security risk, and to permit discovery. Both parties agree, however, that the 

current deadlines for motions for summary judgment, the completion of mediation, the 

completion of discovery, motions in limine, and trial, should either be stayed or extended.

However, several of those deadlines are impending, including the deadlines for motions 

for summary judgment and the completion of mediation, which currently fall on June 15. ECF 

No. 12 at 1. The parties previously requested a decision on their scheduling motions by June 5. 

Given that the case was recently reassigned to the Court, and to provide clarity on the governing 

schedule for further proceedings, the parties renew their request and ask for a decision on these 

motions by June 9. For ease of reference, the parties’ proposed orders are attached.

Dated: June 8, 2023

/s/ Kelly B. McClanahan 

Kelly B. McClanahan, Esq. 

N.D. Tex. Bar #984704DC 

Respectfully submitted,

BRIAN M. BOYNTON

Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General

Case 3:22-cv-00706-E Document 23 Filed 06/08/23 Page 2 of 4 PageID 438
3 

National Security Counselors 

4702 Levada Terrace 

Rockville, MD 20853 

301-728-5908 

240-681-2189 fax 

Kel@NationalSecurityLaw.org 

Attorney for Plaintiff

ANTHONY J. COPPOLINO

Deputy Branch Director

/s/ John T. Lewis

JOHN T. LEWIS (TX Bar No. 24095074)

RACHAEL WESTMORELAND (GA Bar 

No. 539498)

Trial Attorneys

U.S. Department of Justice

Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch

1100 L Street NW, Rm. 12002

Washington, D.C. 20530 

Tel: (202) 353-0533 

E-mail: john.t.lewis.iii@usdoj.gov 

Attorneys for Defendant

Case 3:22-cv-00706-E Document 23 Filed 06/08/23 Page 3 of 4 PageID 439
4 

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

I hereby certify that on June 7, 2023, I conferred by email with counsel for Plaintiff 

concerning the relief requested in this filing. Counsel for Plaintiff indicated that Plaintiff joined 

in the request for expedited consideration. 

/s/ John T. Lewis

John T. Lewis

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on June 8, 2023, a copy of the foregoing was filed electronically via 

the Court’s ECF system, which effects service upon counsel of record.

/s/ John T. Lewis

John T. Lewis

Case 3:22-cv-00706-E Document 23 Filed 06/08/23 Page 4 of 4 PageID 440