Lisa Hay

Federal Public Defender

Rich Federico

Assistant Federal Public Defender

101 S.W. Main Street, Suite 1700

Portland, Oregon 97204

(503) 326-2123 Telephone

(503) 326-5524 Facsimile

Lisa_Hay@fd.org

Rich_Federico@fd.org

Attorneys for Defendant Ryan Payne

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

PORTLAND DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

AMMON BUNDY, JON RITZHEIMER,

JOSEPH O’SHAUGHNESSY,

RYAN PAYNE, RYAN BUNDY,

BRIAN CAVALIER, SHAWNA COX,

PETER SANTILLI, JASON PATRICK,

DUANE LEO EHMER,

DYLAN ANDERSON, SEAN ANDERSON,

DAVID LEE FRY,

JEFF WAYNE BANTA,

SANDRA LYNN ANDERSON, 

KENNETH MEDENBACH, BLAINE

COOPER, WESLEY KJAR, COREY

LEQUIEU, NEIL WAMPLER, JASON

CHARLES BLOMGREN, DARRYL

WILLIAM THORN, GEOFFREY

STANEK, TRAVIS COX, ERIC

LEE FLORES, and JAKE RYAN,

Defendants.

Case No. 3:16-cr-00051-BR

JOINT PROPOSAL FOR ROUND 

ONE MOTIONS AGENDA &

CALENDAR FOR ROUND TWO 

MOTIONS

PAGE 1. JOINT PROPOSAL FOR ROUND ONE MOTIONS AGENDA & CALENDAR FOR ROUND TWO 

MOTIONS

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 540 Filed 05/11/16 Page 1 of 5
The defendants, through AFPD Rich Federico, and the government, through AUSA Ethan 

Knight, submit the following Joint Proposal For Round One Motions Agenda and Calendar For 

Round Two Motions, in accordance with paragraphs 6 and 7 of the Court’s Order (Doc. 523). 

CERTIFICATION OF CONFERRAL: Undersigned counsel certifies that Assistant 

United States Attorney Ethan Knight was provided a copy of, and consulted regarding the content 

of this Joint Proposal. The proposals herein represent the positions of both the defendants and the 

government.

PROPOSED AGENDA FOR MOTIONS ARGUMENT ON MAY 23-25, 2016

The following is a list of what the parties believe are all motions pending to be argued as 

Round One motions, the order in which the parties propose the argument be scheduled for the 

hearing that begins on May 23, 2016, and the amount of time the parties request be allotted for 

each motion. Regarding the time allotment, the proposal represents the best estimate for the total 

time for argument for both parties, and the parties attempted to over-estimate the time needed for 

each argument. If there is a variance in the time estimate, it would likely occur based upon the 

substance of the Government’s Responses, not yet filed, or to ensure counsel can answer any 

questions the Court may pose. 

1. Mr. Ammon Bundy’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction (Doc. 527) (R. Bundy) –

120 minutes total time allotted for argument;

2. Mr. Payne’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 480) (Mr. Federico) – 60 minutes total

time allotted for argument;

3. Mr. Medenbach’s Motion to Dismiss (Docs. 505, 506) (Mr. Medenbach) – 60

minutes total time allotted for argument;

PAGE 2. JOINT PROPOSAL FOR ROUND ONE MOTIONS AGENDA & CALENDAR FOR ROUND TWO 

MOTIONS

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 540 Filed 05/11/16 Page 2 of 5
4. Mr. O’Shaughnessy’s Motion to Dismiss Count 1 for Vagueness (Doc. 471) (Ms. Baggio)

– 120 minutes total time allotted for argument;

5. Ms. Cox and Mr. Ryan’s Motion to Dismiss Count 1 as Overbroad (Doc. 474) (Ms. Harris

and Mr. Merrithew) – 90 minutes total time allotted for argument;

6. Mr. Santilli’s Motion to Dismiss Count 1 as Vague, As-Applied (Docs. 477, 478) (Mr. 

Coan) – 60 minutes total time allotted for argument;

7. Mr. Santilli’s Motion to Dismiss Count 1 as Constitutionally Protected Conduct (Doc. 479) 

(Mr. Coan) – 60 minutes total time allotted for argument;

8. Mr. Stanek’s Motion to Dismiss Count 2 for Vagueness and as Overbroad (Docs. 482, 483) 

(Mr. Andersen) – 120 minutes total time allotted for argument;

9. Mr. Fry’s Motion to Dismiss Count 3 of the Superseding Indictment (Docs. 465, 466) 

(Mr. Olson) – 120 minutes total time allotted for argument;

10. Mr. Fry’s Motion to Compel Discovery (Doc. 493) (Mr. Olson) – 30 minutes total time

allotted for argument;

11. Mr. O’Shaughnessy’s Motion for Bill of Particulars (Doc. 469) (Ms. Baggio) – 30 minutes

total time allotted for argument; and

12. Mr. R. Bundy’s Motion to Inspect Grand Jury Records (Doc. 481) (Mr. R. Bundy) – 30

minutes total time allotted for argument.

PROPOSED CALENDAR FOR ROUND TWO MOTIONS

At the Status Conference held on May 4, 2016, the Court and the parties discussed a 

schedule for the filing and argument for Round Two motions. This discussion arose from the 

proposed calendar submitted by the parties in the Joint Status Report of April 28, 2016 (Doc. 488). 

PAGE 3. JOINT PROPOSAL FOR ROUND ONE MOTIONS AGENDA & CALENDAR FOR ROUND TWO 

MOTIONS

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 540 Filed 05/11/16 Page 3 of 5
As it is necessary to amend the proposed schedule, and responsive to paragraph 7 of the Court’s 

Order (Doc. 523), the parties propose the following (dates relate only to Round 2 motions and not 

dates relating to other deadlines or case events):

June 15, 2016 Round Two Defendants’ Motions Due (Doc. 523, para. 7).

June 15, 2016 June Status Hearing, 9:30AM (Doc. 523, para. 8) – Include a discussion 

regarding the likely number of days needed for hearing(s) to litigate 

Round Two motions.

June 29, 2016 Round Two Government Responses Due (Doc. 523, para. 7).

July 18-22, 2016 Hearings on Round Two Motions.

Aug. 1-5, 2016 If necessary, additional Hearings on Round Two Motions.

There are several purposes in bifurcating hearing dates on Round Two motions. First, it 

may be possible to resolve all Round Two motions in one week, July 18-22. If, however, it is 

apparent from the filings that more than one week will be required, the parties can schedule an 

argument calendar such that those motions that are more time-sensitive can be argued, and 

potentially resolved, prior to the first week of August. Second, there is already a Status Hearing

set for August 3, 2016.1

 The parties will be in a better position at the conclusion of a week-long 

hearing on July 18-22 to know how much additional time will be needed and how many days, in 

addition to August 3rd, may be needed. Finally, a week separation will allow the Court and the 

parties sufficient time to fill any factual or legal research gaps that may arise during the first week 

of litigation on Round 2 motions.

1 The Status Hearing could either be subsumed as part of additional motion hearing dates, or 

continued as currently scheduled if no additional days are needed after July 22nd to resolve Round 

Two motions.

PAGE 4. JOINT PROPOSAL FOR ROUND ONE MOTIONS AGENDA & CALENDAR FOR ROUND TWO 

MOTIONS

 

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 540 Filed 05/11/16 Page 4 of 5
Respectfully submitted this 11th day of May, 2016.

___________________________

Rich Federico

Assistant Federal Public Defender

Attorney for Mr. Payne

PAGE 5. JOINT PROPOSAL FOR ROUND ONE MOTIONS AGENDA & CALENDAR FOR ROUND TWO 

MOTIONS

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 540 Filed 05/11/16 Page 5 of 5