The opinion of the court was delivered by: Troy L. Nunley United States District Judge
STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER
Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, defendant NINA NGUYEN, by and through her counsel of record, Scott N. Cameron, and LUAN TRAN, by and through his counsel of record, MICHAEL BIGELOW, hereby stipulate as follows:
1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on May 9, 2013, at 9:30 a.m.
2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until June 13, 2013, at 9:30 a.m., and to exclude time between May 9, 2013, and June 13, 2013, under Local Code T4. Plaintiff does not oppose this request.
3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following:
a. The government has produced approximately 22,093 pages of discovery to the 1 defense.
b. Respective counsel for each defendant desires additional time to review the document discovery, consult with their client regarding the discovery, conduct investigation, and to discuss potential resolution with their client and the government.
c. Counsel for each defendant believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny defendants the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
d. The government does not object to the continuance.
e. Based on the above-stated findings, the ends of justice served by continuing the case as requested outweigh the interest of the public and the defendant in a trial within the original date prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act.
f. For the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161, et seq., within which trial must commence, the time period of May 9, 2013, to June 13, 2013, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 3161(h)(7)(A), B(iv) [Local Code T4] because it results from a continuance granted by the Court at defendant's request on the basis of the Court's finding that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.
(THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
4. Nothing in this stipulation and order shall preclude a finding that other provisions of the Speedy Trial Act dictate that additional time periods are excludable from ...