IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

DALLAS DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

v. 

TIMOTHY LYNCH BARTON 

Defendant 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

No. 3-22-CR-00352-K 

 

 

DEFENDANT BARTON’S UNOPPOSED MOTION AND BRIEF TO 

CONTINUE THE TRIAL AND TO AMEND THE SCHEDULING ORDER 

TO EXTEND CASE REALATED DEADLINES FOR A CONTINUED TRIAL 

 Defendant Timothy L. Barton files this motion requesting that the Court continue the trial 

date for sixty (60) days until February 2023. The Defendant further moves to amend the Court’s 

scheduling order to adjust case-related deadlines for a continued trial date, in particular the Court’s 

current deadline for filing pretrial motions. The Government does not oppose the foregoing 

requests. 

I. Background

 On September 20, 2022, the grand jury charged defendant Timothy L. Barton in a ninecount indictment with Wire Fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343 (Counts 1-7), Conspiracy to 

Commit Wire Fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349 (Count 8), and Securities Fraud, 15 U.S.C. 

§§ 78j(b) and 78ff (Count 9), which was filed under seal in this Court. Mr. Barton was arrested 

on September 23, 2022, on which day the indictment was unsealed. Mr. Barton’s dawn arrest was 

the first time either he or his then-counsel had any notice of a pending criminal investigation. Mr. 

Barton was released under conditions on September 26, 2022. (Doc. 12). 

Case 3:22-cr-00352-K Document 41 Filed 11/04/22 Page 1 of 5 PageID 96
In the ensuing weeks, Mr. Barton worked hard to assemble a team of lawyers to defend the 

criminal prosecution, with one his law firms having been retained and entered an appearance only 

two weeks ago. 

On October 4, 2022, the Court entered a pretrial scheduling order, setting certain pretrial 

deadlines, and a trial date of December 5, 2022. (Doc. 15, at 1). Under that order, the Defendant 

must file any pretrial motions by November 4, 2022. (Doc. 15, at 1). 

This case concerns allegations of the mishandling of more than 20 million dollars of loan 

proceeds in connection with more than a half-dozen complex real estate redevelopment projects, 

spanning nearly a half-decade. Needless to say, this case concerns sophisticated commercial 

transactions for which documentary evidence is crucial. 

In light of the importance and volume of documentary evidence, the Government has begun 

to produce on November 2, 2022 one of several hard drives of electronic discovery pursuant to its 

discovery obligations. The Government has indicated it will provide the remaining materials, 

which appear to constitute a vast majority of what must be produced, in the near future. 

 On the same day that Mr. Barton was arrested—September 23, 2022—the Securities and 

Exchange Commission (“SEC”) filed a complaint against him, a Dallas real estate developer, 

Stephen T. Wall, and a Chinese national, Haoqiang Fu (also known as “Michael Fu”). SEC v. 

Barton, et al., N.D. Tex. No. 3:22-CV-2118-X. On October 18, 2022, U.S. District Judge Brantley 

Starr granted the SEC’s motion to appoint a receiver over every company that Mr. Barton owns or 

controls. The receiver then seized Mr. Barton’s office and personal residence, to which he no 

longer has access. Mr. Barton must obtain access to business and personal documents in his office 

and residence in order to prepare his defense to this criminal case, and relief from the receiver’s 

actions has not yet occurred. 

Case 3:22-cr-00352-K Document 41 Filed 11/04/22 Page 2 of 5 PageID 97
II. The Court Should Continue the Trial for Sixty Days (Until February 2023) and 

Amend the Scheduling Order to Push Current Case Related Deadlines to January 2023.

 Defendant requests that the Court continue the trial for approximately sixty (60) days from 

December 5, 2022, until February 2023 and to amend the scheduling order to extend case-related 

deadlines, including the deadline for the Defendant to file pretrial motions accordingly. 

The defense team needs to receive and understand the scope of pretrial discovery. 

Moreover, in light the SEC court-appointed receiver seizing Mr. Barton’s office and residence, 

Mr. Barton also needs more time to regain access to his business and personal documents that he 

will need adequately to prepare for trial. The combination of the volume of Government 

productions yet to come and the Securities and Exchange Commission’s efforts to evict Mr. Barton 

from his office and residence and to effectively cut him off from the materials necessary to defend 

himself, makes this continuance necessary and in the interests of justice. 

 The Speedy Trial Act generally requires a criminal defendant’s trial to start within seventy 

days of indictment or arraignment, whichever occurs later. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(c)(1). But “the Act 

recognizes that criminal cases vary widely and that there are valid reasons for greater delay in 

particular cases.” Zedner v. United States, 547 U.S. 489, 497 (2006). To “provide the necessary 

flexibility, the Act includes a long and detailed list of periods of delay that are excluded in 

computing the time within which trial must start.” Id. Relevant here, the Act excludes “[a]ny 

period of delay resulting from a continuance granted” on, inter alia, “the request of the defendant” 

as long as “the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public 

and the defendant in a speedy trial.” 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A). One pertinent factor is whether 

the failure to grant a continuance “would deny counsel for the defendant . . . the reasonable time 

Case 3:22-cr-00352-K Document 41 Filed 11/04/22 Page 3 of 5 PageID 98
necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.” 18 U.S.C. 

§ 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). 

 Here, Mr. Barton needs time to obtain and review a substantial amount of discovery from 

the government. After that review, Mr. Barton’s counsel will likely need time to interview 

potential witnesses, research various legal and factual issues, and file pretrial motions. Moreover, 

Mr. Barton must regain access to his business and personal files currently under the control of the 

receiver. Both the Government and Barton agree that, under these circumstances, the ends of 

justice are served by granting the continuance and that such action outweighs the best interest of 

the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 

IV. Conclusion

 Defendant Timothy Barton respectfully requests that the Court continue the trial in this 

matter for sixty (60) days until February 2022 and amend the scheduling order to extend caserelated deadlines to corresponding dates in January 2023 . 

Dated: November 4, 2022 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Michael J. Edney 

Michael J. Edney 

Virginia Bar No. 48253 

DC Bar No. 492024 (application for 

admission pending)

medney@huntonak.com 

Sean B. O’Connell 

State Bar No. 24103142 (application for 

admission forthcoming)

soconnell@huntonak.com 

Michael Dingman 

Virginia Bar No. 95762 

DC Bar No. 90001474 (application for 

admission forthcoming) 

mdingman@huntonak.com 

HUNTON ANDREWS KURTH LLP 

2200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20037

Case 3:22-cr-00352-K Document 41 Filed 11/04/22 Page 4 of 5 PageID 99
Phone: (202) 955-1500

Facsimile: (202) 778-2201 

Ted A. Huffman 

State Bar No. 24089015 

thuffman@huntonak.com 

HUNTON ANDREWS KURTH LLP

1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 3700 

Dallas, Texas 75202 

Phone: (214) 979-3000 

Facsimile: (214) 740-7110 

 Richard B. Roper 

State Bar No. 17233700 

richard.roper@hklaw.com

Javan Porter 

State Bar No. 24116912 

javan.porter@hklaw.com 

HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP 

1722 Routh Street, Suite 1500 

Dallas, Texas 75201 

Phone: (214) 969-1345 

Facsimile: (214) 999-9252 

COUNSEL FOR TIMOTHY LYNCH BARTON 

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE 

On November 2, 2022, I conferred with Assistant United States Attorney Renee Hunter 

who informed me that the government does not oppose the requested 60-day continuance of trial 

and an extension of case-related deadlines. 

 /s/ Richard B. Roper 

 Richard B. Roper 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

On November 4, 2022 I filed the foregoing document with the clerk of court for the U.S. 

District Court, Northern District of Texas. I hereby certify that I have served the document on all 

counsel and/or pro se parties of record by a manner authorized by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 

5(b)(2). 

 /s/ Michael J. Edney 

 Michael J. Edney 

Case 3:22-cr-00352-K Document 41 Filed 11/04/22 Page 5 of 5 PageID 100