CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
| CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY |
| U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR and UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR |
| 1:2020cv02665 |
| September 21, 2020 |
| US District Court for the District of Columbia |
| Carl J Nichols |
| Freedom of Information Act |
| 05 U.S.C. ยง 552 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 3, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Set/Reset Deadlines: Joint Status Report due by 11/24/2020. (zcal) |
MINUTE ORDER. Before the Court in this Freedom of Information Act case are a Complaint and an Answer. According to Local Civil Rule 16.3, the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f) are inapplicable. It is hereby ORDERED that the Parties shall confer and file a Joint Status Report on or before November 24, 2020. The Joint Status Report shall address: (1) the status of Plaintiff's FOIA request; (2) the anticipated number of documents responsive to Plaintiff's FOIA request; (3) the anticipated date(s) for release of the documents requested by Plaintiff; (4) whether a motion for stay is likely under Open America v. Watergate Special Prosecution Force, 547 F.2d 605 (D.C. Cir. 1976); (5) the possibility of prioritizing documents responsive to Plaintiff's request and any discussions regarding whether Plaintiff's request can be narrowed; and (6) whether the Parties anticipate summary judgment briefing and, if so, a proposed briefing schedule. Signed by Judge Carl J. Nichols on November 3, 2020. (lccjn2)
|
| Filing 6 ANSWER to Complaint by UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR.(Moustakas, John) |
| Filing 5 RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed as to the United States Attorney. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney on 10/1/2020. Answer due for ALL FEDERAL DEFENDANTS by 10/31/2020. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Mail Receipts)(Snape, William) |
|
MINUTE ORDER. The Court having considered Plaintiff's #4 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice of Lalli Venkatakrishnan, and it appearing to the Court that the attorney referenced therein meets the requirements for pro hac vice admission under Local Civil Rule 83.2(d), it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED. It is further ORDERED that Lalli Venkatakrishnan is ADMITTED to practice before the Court pro hac vice. Counsel should register for e-filing via PACER and file a notice of appearance pursuant to LCvR 83.6(a). #Click for instructions. Signed by Judge Carl J. Nichols on September 24, 2020. (lccjn2)
|
| Filing 4 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice :Attorney Name- Lalli Venkatakrishnan, Filing fee $ 100, receipt number ADCDC-7629291. Fee Status: Fee Paid. by CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY (Attachments: #1 Declaration, #2 Text of Proposed Order)(Snape, William) |
|
Filing 3
STANDING ORDER. Signed by Judge Carl J. Nichols on September 22, 2020. (lccjn2)
|
| Filing 2 SUMMONS (3) Issued Electronically as to UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (Attachments: #1 Notice and Consent) (zmd) |
| Case Assigned to Judge Carl J. Nichols. (zmd) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number ADCDC-7614637) filed by CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons Interior, #3 Summons US AG, #4 Summons US Atty DC, #5 Declaration Corporate Disclosure)(Snape, William) |
Access additional case information on PACER
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 District Of Columbia 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
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.
