Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States of America v. Jai Hiten Patel

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


October 20, 2011

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
JAI HITEN PATEL, DEFENDANT.

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney MICHAEL M. BECKWITH Assistant U.S. Attorney 501 "I" Street, Suite 10-100 Sacramento, California 95814 Telephone: (916) 554-2797

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RESETTING STATUS CONFERENCE, AND EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

The United States of America, through its counsels of record, Benjamin B. Wagner, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of California, and Michael M. Beckwith, Assistant United States Attorney, and defendant Jai Hiten Patel, through his counsel of record, Jesse Garcia, Esq., hereby stipulate and agree that the status conference set for October 24, 2011, be continued to January 9, 2012. The parties need additional time for preparation. Therefore, the parties have agreed and respectfully request that the Court set the date of January 9, 2012, for the status conference.

Accordingly, the parties stipulate that time be excluded pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii) and (iv) and Local Code T4, to give the defendant time to further review the discovery and to adequately prepare. The parties agreed that the ends of justice served by granting the defendant's request for a continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

ORDER

UPON GOOD CAUSE SHOWN and by stipulation of all parties, it is hereby ordered that the status conference set for October 24, 2011, at 9:30 a.m., be continued to January 9, 2012 at 9:30 a.m., and that the time beginning October 24, 2011, extending through and including January 9, 2012, be excluded from the calculation of time under the Speedy Trial Act. The Court finds that the interests of justice served by granting this continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20111020

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.