| Date Filed | Doc # | Docket Text |
|
| 2020-02-26 | 1 | COMPLAINT against CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number ADCDC-6866664) filed by JASON LEOPOLD, BUZZFEED INC.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H, # 9 Civil Cover Sheet, # 10 Summons)(Topic, Matthew) (Entered: 02/26/2020) |
| 2020-02-26 | 2 | NOTICE of Appearance by Matthew Topic on behalf of BUZZFEED INC., JASON LEOPOLD (Topic, Matthew) (Entered: 02/26/2020) |
| 2020-02-26 | 3 | LCvR 26.1 CERTIFICATE OF DISCLOSURE of Corporate Affiliations and Financial Interests by BUZZFEED INC. (Topic, Matthew) (Entered: 02/26/2020) |
| 2020-02-27 | | Case Assigned to Judge Timothy J. Kelly. (adh, ) (Entered: 02/27/2020) |
| 2020-02-27 | 4 | SUMMONS (5) Issued Electronically as to CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (Attachment: # 1 Notice and Consent)(adh, ) (Entered: 02/27/2020) |
| 2020-03-27 | 5 | RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY served on 3/10/2020 (Topic, Matthew) (Entered: 03/27/2020) |
| 2020-03-27 | 6 | RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE served on 3/10/2020 (Topic, Matthew) (Entered: 03/27/2020) |
| 2020-03-27 | 7 | RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE served on 3/9/2020 (Topic, Matthew) (Entered: 03/27/2020) |
| 2020-03-27 | 8 | RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed on United States Attorney General. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney General 3/10/2020. (Topic, Matthew) (Entered: 03/27/2020) |
| 2020-03-27 | 9 | RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed as to the United States Attorney. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney on 3/10/2020. Answer due for ALL FEDERAL DEFENDANTS by 4/9/2020. (Topic, Matthew) (Entered: 03/27/2020) |
| 2020-04-07 | 10 | NOTICE of Appearance by Christopher Robert Healy on behalf of All Defendants (Healy, Christopher) (Entered: 04/07/2020) |
| 2020-04-08 | 11 | ANSWER to Complaint by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Healy, Christopher) (Entered: 04/08/2020) |
| 2020-04-08 | | MINUTE ORDER: Before the Court in this FOIA case are a complaint and an answer. It is hereby ORDERED that the parties shall meet, confer, and file a joint proposed schedule for briefing or disclosure by May 8, 2020. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 4/8/2020. (lctjk3) (Entered: 04/08/2020) |
| 2020-04-08 | | Set/Reset Deadlines: Joint Proposed Briefing Schedule or Disclosure due by 5/8/2020. (zkh) (Entered: 04/08/2020) |
| 2020-05-08 | 12 | Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Joint Schedule Due to COVID-19 Work Requirements by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (Healy, Christopher) (Entered: 05/08/2020) |
| 2020-05-08 | | MINUTE ORDER granting, for good cause shown, Defendants' 12 Motion for Extension of Time. It is hereby ORDERED that the parties shall meet, confer, and file a joint proposed schedule for briefing or disclosure by June 22, 2020. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 5/8/2020. (lctjk3) (Entered: 05/08/2020) |
| 2020-06-22 | 13 | Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Joint Schedule Due to COVID-19 Work Requirements by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (Healy, Christopher) (Entered: 06/22/2020) |
| 2020-06-22 | | MINUTE ORDER granting, for good cause shown, Defendants' 13 Motion for Extension of Time. It is hereby ORDERED that the parties shall meet, confer, and file a joint proposed schedule for briefing or disclosure by July 22, 2020. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 6/22/2020. (lctjk3) (Entered: 06/22/2020) |
| 2020-07-22 | 14 | Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Joint Production Schedule by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (Healy, Christopher) (Entered: 07/22/2020) |
| 2020-07-23 | | MINUTE ORDER granting, for good cause shown, Defendants' 14 Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time. It is hereby ORDERED that the parties shall meet, confer, and file a joint proposed schedule for briefing or disclosure by August 21, 2020. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 7/23/2020. (lctjk3) (Entered: 07/23/2020) |
| 2020-08-06 | 15 | VACATED PURSUANT TO MINUTE ORDER FILED 9/28/2020..... STANDING ORDER. See Order for details. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 8/6/2020. (lctjk3) Modified on 9/28/2020 (zkh). (Entered: 08/06/2020) |
| 2020-08-21 | 16 | Joint STATUS REPORT by BUZZFEED, INC., JASON LEOPOLD. (Topic, Matthew) (Entered: 08/21/2020) |
| 2020-08-22 | | MINUTE ORDER: Upon consideration of the parties' 16 Joint Proposed Schedule, it is hereby ORDERED that the parties shall submit a joint status report by September 25, 2020. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 8/22/2020. (lctjk3) (Entered: 08/22/2020) |
| 2020-09-25 | 17 | Joint STATUS REPORT by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. (Healy, Christopher) (Entered: 09/25/2020) |
| 2020-09-28 | | MINUTE ORDER: Upon consideration of the parties' 17 Joint Status Report, it is hereby ORDERED that the parties shall submit a further joint status report by November 30, 2020. It is further ORDERED that the Court's 15 Standing Order is vacated, as the standing order is not intended to govern FOIA cases. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 9/28/2020. (lctjk3) (Entered: 09/28/2020) |
| 2020-11-30 | 18 | Joint STATUS REPORT by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. (Healy, Christopher) (Entered: 11/30/2020) |
| 2020-12-01 | | MINUTE ORDER: Upon consideration of the parties' 18 Joint Status Report, it is hereby ORDERED that the parties shall submit a further joint status report by December 11, 2020. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 12/01/2020. (lctjk3) (Entered: 12/01/2020) |
| 2020-12-11 | 19 | Joint STATUS REPORT by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. (Healy, Christopher) (Entered: 12/11/2020) |
| 2020-12-14 | | MINUTE ORDER: Upon consideration of the parties' 19 Joint Status Report, it is hereby ORDERED that the parties shall submit a further joint status report by January 11, 2021. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 12/14/2020. (lctjk3) (Entered: 12/14/2020) |
| 2021-01-11 | 20 | Joint STATUS REPORT by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. (Healy, Christopher) (Entered: 01/11/2021) |
| 2021-01-13 | | MINUTE ORDER: Upon consideration of the parties' 20 Joint Status Report, it is hereby ORDERED that the parties shall submit a further joint status report by January 15, 2021. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 1/13/2021. (lctjk3) (Entered: 01/13/2021) |
| 2021-01-15 | 21 | Joint STATUS REPORT by BUZZFEED, INC., JASON LEOPOLD. (Topic, Matthew) (Entered: 01/15/2021) |
| 2021-01-21 | | MINUTE ORDER: Upon consideration of the parties' 21 Joint Status Report, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendants' motion for summary judgment is due by March 12, 2021; Plaintiffs' opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment are due by March 30, 2021; Defendants' reply and cross-opposition are due by April 20, 2021; and Plaintiffs' cross-reply is due by May 11, 2021. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 1/21/2021. (lctjk3) (Entered: 01/21/2021) |
| 2021-01-21 | | Set/Reset Deadlines: Response to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 3/30/2021. Reply to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 4/20/2021. (zkh) (Entered: 01/21/2021) |
| 2021-03-05 | 22 | MOTION for Extension of Time to file Motion for Summary Judgment by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. (Healy, Christopher) (Entered: 03/05/2021) |
| 2021-03-11 | | MINUTE ORDER granting Defendants' 22 Motion for Extension of Time: It is hereby ORDERED, for good cause shown, that Defendants' 22 Motion is GRANTED. Defendants shall file their motion for summary judgment by March 19, 2021. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 03/11/2021. (lctjk3) (Entered: 03/11/2021) |
| 2021-03-19 | 23 | MOTION for Summary Judgment by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Jones Declaration, # 2 Exhibit Blaine Declaration, # 3 Statement of Facts)(Healy, Christopher) (Entered: 03/19/2021) |
| 2021-03-23 | 24 | Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to Briefing Schedule by BUZZFEED, INC., JASON LEOPOLD. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Topic, Matthew) (Entered: 03/23/2021) |
| 2021-03-23 | | MINUTE ORDER granting Plaintiffs' 24 Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time: It is hereby ORDERED, for good cause shown, that Plaintiffs' 24 Motion is GRANTED. The briefing schedule is hereby amended as follows: (1) Plaintiffs' opposition to motion for summary judgment and cross-motion for summary judgment shall be due by April 13, 2021, (2) Defendants' reply in support of motion for summary judgment and opposition to cross-motion for summary judgment shall be due by May 4, 2021, and (3) Plaintiffs' reply in support of cross-motion for summary judgment shall be due by May 25, 2021. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 03/23/2021. (lctjk3) (Entered: 03/23/2021) |
| 2021-03-24 | | Set/Reset Deadlines: Response to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 4/13/2021. Reply to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 5/4/2021. (zkh) (Entered: 03/24/2021) |
| 2021-04-13 | 25 | Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment by BUZZFEED, INC., JASON LEOPOLD. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B, # 4 Statement of Facts Response to SOF, # 5 Text of Proposed Order)(Topic, Matthew) (Entered: 04/13/2021) |
| 2021-04-13 | 26 | Memorandum in opposition to re 23 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by BUZZFEED, INC., JASON LEOPOLD. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Statement of Facts Response to Statement of Facts, # 4 Text of Proposed Order)(Topic, Matthew) (Entered: 04/13/2021) |
| 2021-05-04 | 27 | Memorandum in opposition to re 25 Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment and Reply in Support of Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment filed by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. (Attachments: # 1 Statement of Facts)(Healy, Christopher) (Entered: 05/04/2021) |
| 2021-05-04 | 28 | REPLY to opposition to motion re 23 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. (See Docket Entry 27 to view document). (znmw) (Entered: 05/06/2021) |
| 2021-05-25 | 29 | REPLY to opposition to motion re 25 Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by BUZZFEED, INC., JASON LEOPOLD. (Topic, Matthew) (Entered: 05/25/2021) |
| 2021-07-08 | 30 | NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY by BUZZFEED, INC., JASON LEOPOLD (Topic, Matthew) (Entered: 07/08/2021) |
| 2021-07-09 | 31 | ERRATA re 30 NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY by BUZZFEED, INC., JASON LEOPOLD (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Decision)(Topic, Matthew); Modified docketing event, text, and added docket entry relationship on 7/12/2021 (ztth). (Entered: 07/09/2021) |
| 2021-07-13 | 32 | RESPONSE re 31 NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY filed by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. (Healy, Christopher) (Entered: 07/13/2021) |
| 2022-08-16 | | MINUTE ORDER denying without prejudice in part Defendants' 23 Motion for Summary Judgment and Plaintiffs' 25 Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. In this FOIA case, the parties have cross-moved for summary judgment as to three issues stemming from requests about President Trump's July 2019 call with the President of Ukraine. The Court begins with the adequacy of DOJ's search for the requested records: (1) criminal referrals about an alleged campaign finance violation of President Trump during the call and (2) any "declinations to open up a formal criminal inquiry" into the President's conduct. ECF No. 23-1 ¶ 6. When an agency's search is challenged on summary judgment, the "agency must show that it made a good faith effort to conduct a search for the requested records, using methods which can be reasonably expected to produce the information requested." Cole v. Copan , 485 F. Supp. 3d 243, 250 (D.D.C. 2020) (cleaned up). It can do this "by providing declarations...that are relatively detailed, nonconclusory and submitted in good faith." Id. (cleaned up). Here, DOJ's declarant explains that the only search conducted was the Criminal Division's Deputy Assistant Attorney General's search of his email accounts and hard copy files. ECF No. 23-1 ¶ 13. This is so, she says, because the DAAG was "one of only two individuals involved in reviewing the referral and drafting the recommendation memorandum" eventually sent to the Assistant Attorney General. Id. ¶ 12. Plaintiffs argue that DOJ should have searched for records in its Public Integrity Section, since the declarant mentions that the Director of the Election Crimes Branch of that unit concurred with the DAAG's recommendation memorandum. ECF No. 25-1 at 2-3. But the Director's mere "concurrence," ECF No. 23-1 ¶ 16, with the recommendation does not suggest that Public Integrity would have any unidentified copies of "criminal referrals" or "declinations to open up a formal criminal inquiry," which is all Plaintiffs requested, id. ¶ 6. That said, there are gaps in DOJ's explanation of its search that give the Court pause. Its declarant concludes that the DAAG "would be in possession of all relevant communications regarding [the recommendation] process," so "a search by him would not exclude any likely sources of responsive records." Id. ¶ 13. But the declarant does not explain why the DAAG would have "all relevant communications." The Government says that the DAAG told the declarant that he would, ECF No. 27 at 3, but the declarant never says so, ECF No. 23-1 ¶ ¶ 11-13. The declarant simply asserts it as fact. The declarant, and the Government's response more generally, also appear to take as a given that there was only one declination (and corresponding recommendation) for multiple "referrals from the Intelligence Community Inspector General," but the declarant never states that clearly. Id. ¶ 13. In fact, confusingly, at times she also suggests that the DAAG's recommendation was in response to only one "referral." Id. ¶ 12. And against this backdrop, the declarant never explains why the second individual "involved in reviewing the referral and recommendation memorandum" never searched his or her files for responsive records. Id. There may be an explanation why this person's files would be unlikely to possess any other responsive records -- because, for example, there was only one recommendation memorandum relating to all the relevant declinations and all the relevant referrals, but if so, DOJ needs to say that more clearly. All in all, the "Court cannot fill in these gaps for the agency under the auspices of good-faith deference. It is the agency's burden to supply this information to secure summary judgment, and [DOJ] has failed to meet that burden." Nat'l Sec. Couns. v. CIA , 960 F. Supp. 2d 101, 154 (D.D.C. 2013). The Court shall provide DOJ the opportunity to provide a more detailed declaration alongside a renewed motion for summary judgment, or proceed otherwise in a manner consistent with its obligations under FOIA. But, given the above, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendants' 23 Motion for Summary Judgment and Plaintiffs' 25 Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE IN PART. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 8/16/2022. (lctjk1) (Entered: 08/16/2022) |
| 2022-08-16 | | MINUTE ORDER granting in part Defendant's 23 Motion for Summary Judgment and denying in part Plaintiffs' 25 Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court will grant Defendants summary judgment with respect to the remaining two issues: (1) DOJ's withholding of the DAAG's recommendation memorandum and (2) CIA's Glomar response. DOJ withheld the memorandum under FOIA Exemption 5, invoking both deliberative process privilege and attorney work-product privilege. Plaintiffs do not dispute that the recommendation memorandum is attorney work-product, see ECF No. 25, so the only question is whether DOJ has shown that reasonably foreseeable harm would result from the memorandum's public release. See 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(8)(A). It has. "[T]he context and purpose of withheld information can support a finding of foreseeable harm." Louise Trauma Ctr. LLC v. DHS , No. 20-cv-1128 (TNM), 2022 WL 1081097, at *4 (D.D.C. Apr. 11, 2022) (cleaned up). And the "context and purpose of attorney work product makes self-evident the harm from its disclosure." Id. at *6 (cleaned up); see also, e.g. , Selgjekaj v. Exec. Off. for U.S. Att'ys , No. 20-cv-2145 (CRC), 2021 WL 3472437, at *5 (D.D.C. Aug. 6, 2021). As for the Glomar response, providing one is "proper if the fact of the existence or nonexistence of agency records falls within a FOIA exemption." Wolf v. CIA , 473 F.3d 370, 374 (D.C. Cir. 2007). Here, CIA has sufficiently shown that the existence or nonexistence of records responsive to Plaintiffs' request about the Ukraine call falls under Exemption 1, which protects information properly classified under an Executive Order. Specifically, Executive Order 13526 authorizes the classification of information about "intelligence sources or methods" that "could reasonably be expected to cause identifiable or describable damage to the national security." 75 Fed. Reg. 707 (Jan. 5, 2010). And CIA's declarant explains that the existence or nonexistence of records responsive to Plaintiffs' request would suggest whether CIA "had some type of involvement in, connection to, or intelligence interest" in the Ukraine call. ECF No. 23-2 ¶ 20. That is information CIA generally withholds because it would reveal sensitive information about CIA's "intelligence sources and methods," and disclosure could "reasonably be expected to cause damage to national security." Id. ¶ 21. According to CIA, disclosing the methods could "damag[e] information-sharing relationships" with other countries. Id. Disclosure could also give foreign countries "insight into the CIA's...intelligence priorities or gaps." Id. "Mindful that courts have little expertise in either international diplomacy or counterintelligence operations," this Court is "in no position to dismiss" these "facially reasonable concerns." Frugone v. CIA , 169 F.3d 772, 775 (D.C. Cir. 1999). Thus, the existence or nonexistence of responsive records is properly classified and protected by Exemption 1. The Court need not consider CIA's arguments about another exemption to find its Glomar response proper. For all these reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendants' 23 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED IN PART, with respect to DOJ's withholding of the recommendation letter and CIA's Glomar response, and Plaintiffs' 25 Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED IN PART, with respect to the same. It is further ORDERED that the parties shall file a joint status report by September 2, 2022, updating the Court on how they intend to proceed and proposing a schedule for further proceedings. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 8/16/2022. (lctjk1) (Entered: 08/16/2022) |
| 2022-09-02 | 33 | Joint STATUS REPORT by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. (Healy, Christopher) (Entered: 09/02/2022) |
| 2022-09-08 | | MINUTE ORDER: Upon consideration of the parties' 33 Joint Status Report, it is hereby ORDERED that the following schedule shall govern renewed summary judgment briefing in this case: Defendants shall file their motion for summary judgment by November 18, 2022; Plaintiffs shall file their opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment by December 2, 2022; Defendants shall file their reply and cross-opposition by December 9, 2022; and Plaintiffs shall file their cross-reply by December 16, 2022. It is further ORDERED that the parties are relieved from any requirement in LCvR 7(h)(1). Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 9/8/2022. (lctjk3) (Entered: 09/08/2022) |
| 2022-09-09 | | Set/Reset Deadlines: Cross Motion due by 12/2/2022. Response to Cross Motion due by 12/9/2022. Reply to Cross Motion due by 12/16/2022. (zkh) (Entered: 09/09/2022) |
| 2022-11-18 | 34 | Partial MOTION for Summary Judgment Regarding Adequacy of DOJ Search by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit of Christina Butler)(Healy, Christopher) (Entered: 11/18/2022) |
| 2022-12-02 | 35 | NOTICE of Non-Opposition to Defendants' Renewed Partial Motion for Summary Judgment by BUZZFEED, INC., JASON LEOPOLD (Topic, Matthew) (Entered: 12/02/2022) |
| 2022-12-05 | 36 | ORDER granting Defendants' 34 Renewed Partial Motion for Summary Judgment. See Order for details. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case. Signed by Judge Timothy J. Kelly on 12/5/2022. (lctjk3) (Entered: 12/05/2022) |
 Hide Docket Events |
|
