Electronic Frontier Foundation v. Department of Justice
| Electronic Frontier Foundation |
| Department of Justice |
| 3:2010cv04892 |
| October 28, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| San Francisco Office |
| San Francisco |
| Richard Seeborg |
| Freedom of Information Act |
| 05 U.S.C. ยง 552 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
89
ORDER RE REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 3/4/16. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/4/2016)
|
|
Filing
85
STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE FOR PARTIES TO FILE JOINT REPORT SEEKING CLARIFICATION CONCERNING SCOPE OF COURTS SUMMARY JUDGMENT ORDER. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 1/30/14. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/30/2014)
|
|
Filing
83
ORDER TO SET DEADLINE FOR PARTIES TO FILE JOINT REPORT SEEKING CLARIFICATION CONCERNING SCOPE OF COURT'S SUMMARY JUDGMENT ORDER. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 1/15/14. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/15/2014)
|
|
Filing
81
STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER TO CONTINUE DEADLINE TO FILE PROPOSED JUDGMENT TERMINATING THIS ACTION OR FILE A JOINT STATUS REPORT. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 12/16/13. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/17/2013)
|
|
Filing
79
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE DEADLINE TO FILE A PROPOSED JUDGMENT TERMINATING THIS ACTION. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 12/9/13. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/9/2013)
|
|
Filing
77
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE DEADLINE TO FILE A PROPOSED JUDGMENT TERMINATING THE ACTION. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 11/26/13. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/26/2013)
|
|
Filing
70
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE 69 TO CONTINUE HEARING DATE FOR PARTIES' RENEWED CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Motion Hearing set for 5/30/2013 01:30 PM in Courtroom 3, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Richard Seeborg. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 4/22/13. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/22/2013)
|
|
Filing
62
ORDER RE 61 DEADLINE FOR COMPLETING REVISED VAUGHN INDEX, ADDITIONAL REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS, AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTIONS. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 11/27/12. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/27/2012)
|
|
Filing
60
ORDER RE CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 10/30/12. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/30/2012)
|
|
Filing
50
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE 49 FOR ORDER TO CONTINUE DEADLINE FOR DEFENDANT'S REPLY BRIEF BY ONE DAY. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 4/26/12. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/26/2012)
|
|
Filing
47
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE 45 TO CONTINUE ALL REMAINING DATES IN BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR PARTIES' CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BY TWO WEEKS. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 4/10/12. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/10/2012)
|
|
Filing
34
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE 33 TO CONTINUE ALL DATES FOR PARTIES' CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 2/7/12. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/7/2012)
|
|
Filing
32
ORDER RE 31 SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 1/19/12. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/19/2012)
|
|
Filing
27
ORDER AS MODIFIED BY THE COURT. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is denied without prejudice. Case Management Conference set for 11/17/2011 10:00 AM to be held telephonically. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 3/3/11. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/3/2011)
|
|
Filing
24
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 23 to alter deadline for submitting joint report and allow government counsel to appear telephonically. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 2/24/11. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/24/2011)
|
|
Filing
22
ORDER RE: FURTHER MEET & CONFER. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 2/17/11.(rslc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/17/2011)
|
|
Filing
18
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE 17 TO ALTER BRIEFING SCHEDULE. Motion Hearing set for 2/17/2011 01:30 PM in Courtroom 3, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Richard Seeborg. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 1/13/11. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/13/2011)
|
|
Filing
15
ORDER RE: 14 REASSIGNING CASE TO JUDGE SEEBORG. Initial Case Management Conference set for 3/10/2011 10:00 AM in Courtroom 3, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 1/5/11. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/5/2011)
|
|
Filing
8
ORDER by Judge Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu granting 6 Attorney David Sobel's Motion for admission to appear Pro Hac Vice. (ig, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/30/2010)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Electronic Frontier Foundation v. Department of Justice | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Electronic Frontier Foundation | |
| Represented By: | Jennifer Ann Lynch |
| Represented By: | David L. Sobel |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Department of Justice | |
| Represented By: | Nicholas Patrick Cartier |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
