UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Northern District of California
January 3, 2012
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Maria-Elena James Chief United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO FILE UNDER SEAL AND IN CAMERA
For the Northern District of California For the Northern District of California For the Northern District of California Declaration In Camera and Under Seal. Dkt. Nos. 24, 25. Plaintiff has now filed an opposition in D 16 response. Dkt. No. 26. Plaintiff first argues that the Court's Order was premature because
On December 30, 2011, the Court granted Defendants' Motion for Leave to Present Classified
Defendants specified in their Motion that Plaintiff's response was not due until January 5, 2012.
However, it is Civil Local Rule 7-11(b) which sets forth the opposition filing deadline. Rule 7-11(b) 19 states that any opposition "must be filed no later than 4 days after the motion has been filed." Thus,
as Defendants filed their motion on December 22, 2011, the Court's December 30, 2011 Order was 21 not premature. As to Plaintiff's remaining arguments, the Court finds that an in camera review will 22 not affect Plaintiff's ability to obtain the documents, and in fact might help him, should the Court 23 make such a determination. Accordingly, Plaintiff's request for the Court to reconsider its Order is 24 denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.