Case Detail

FOIA Project Annotation: A court in Tennessee has ruled that the law firm of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd is not entitled to discovery in their case filed against the SEC. The SEC had initially issued a categorical exemption under Exemption 7(A) (interference with ongoing investigation or proceeding), but later provided supplemental affidavits explaining its search and its decision not to conduct a segregability analysis because it contended all the records were exempt. The court found that the agency had provided sufficient explanations to allow the case to move forward on the merits and ruled that discovery was not necessary.
Issues: Litigation - Discovery

FOIA Project Annotation: A federal court in Tennessee has ruled that the SEC properly invoked Exemption 7(A) (interference with ongoing investigation or proceeding) to categorically withhold all records concerning its investigation of Walmart for violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act when it paid bribes to Mexican officials to facilitate Walmart's growth in Mexico. In December 2012, the New York Times published an article based on tens of thousands of documents related to Walmart's bribes to Mexican officials. In January 2013, a congressional committee publicly released internal Walmart documents it had acquired through its own investigation. In response, Walmart announced it had provided extensive documentation to the Justice Department and the SEC, including the documents the committee released. The law firm of Robbins, Geller, Rudman & Dowd made a FOIA request to the SEC for all records provided by Walmart to the agency that related to possible FCPA violations or Walmart's public disclosure concerning such possible violations. The SEC denied the request under Exemption 7(A). When the law firm sued, the agency divided the records into three categories and explained to the court than none of them could be disclosed. Robbins Geller argued the agency had not shown the prospect of enforcement proceedings. Noting that "the SEC must only establish that 'there is at least a reasonable chance that an enforcement proceeding will occur,'" the court found the agency had done so. The law firm contended that one categoryâ€"records received from Walmartâ€"was too vague. The court noted, however, that "the fact that the first category encompasses a variety of types of documents produced by Walmart does not render it a non-functional category. Although there are different types of documents contained in the category, they are all documents that were in Walmart's possession that the SEC believed were important to its investigation." Concluding that the category was appropriate, the court observed that "requiring the SEC to reveal more details about the information Walmart has provided to it could reasonably be expected to interfere with its enforcement proceedings." Robbins Geller asserted that the agency could not withhold records Walmart had itself disclosed publicly. But the court pointed out that "the SEC has not officially acknowledged any portion of the records that are in its investigative file. Although Walmart chose to make public statements about documents it claims it produced to the SEC, based on its own interests, that choice does not obligate the government agency charged with conducting investigations and bringing charges based on violations of federal law to itself divulge what documents it has obtained from a subject of the investigation." The law firm also argued that the disclosures made by the New York Times and Congress diminished the likelihood that disclosure would harm enforcement proceedings. But the court noted that "although some of the documents released by the New York Times and Congress may be contained in the SEC's investigatory file, the SEC's release of those documents in response to a FOIA request will unavoidably reveal the SEC's 'selection process.'" The court explained that "the motivations and interests of a private company subject to an investigation by a government agency, journalist, and Congress, are far different than those of the government agency tasked with investigating and bringing legal actions against those who have violated the law." The court rejected the law firm's claim that the SEC was required to provide a Vaughn index to justify its claims that no information could be segregated and disclosed. The court noted that "although an agency's use of the categorical approach to show that the withheld documents fit into FOIA Exemption 7(A) does not discharge its obligation to consider whether any portion of the records are reasonably segregable, an agency need not create a Vaughn index to account for the agency's determination that none of the responsive records are reasonably segregable. Requiring the government to provide a Vaughn index for purposes of its segregability analysis would eviscerate the policy considerations that have led courts to conclude that the government need not provide such an index to show that its withholding of responsive FOIA documents is justified under Exemption 7(A)."
Issues: Exemption 7(A) - Categorical exemption, Litigation - Segregability analysis

Date Filed	Doc #	Docket Text
2014-11-13	1	COMPLAINT against United States Securities and Exchange Commission filed by Robbins, Geller, Rudman & Dowd, LLP. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 - New York Times Article dated 4/21/2012, # 2 Exhibit 2 - Walmart Statement dated 1/10/2013, # 3 Exhibit 3 - Natash Schultz email dated 4/3/2013, # 4 Exhibit 4 - SEC correspondence dated 5/8/2013, # 5 Exhibit 5 - RGRD correspondence dated 5/22/2013, # 6 Exhibit 6 - SEC correspondenced dated 6/12/2013, # 7 Civil Cover Sheet)(ds) (Entered: 11/13/2014)
2014-11-13	2	SUMMONS ISSUED as to United States Securities and Exchange Commission. (ds) (Entered: 11/13/2014)
2014-11-13	3	NOTICE of Corporate Disclosure Statement filing requirement. (ds) (Entered: 11/13/2014)
2014-11-13		BAR STATUS of Attorneys Christopher Wood of TN and Jason A. Forge and Debra J. Wyman of CA verified as active as of this date. (ds) (Entered: 11/13/2014)
2014-11-13		NOTICE TO COUNSEL Debra Wyman and Jason Forge of CA: WITHIN 20 DAYS (on or before 12/3/2014), counsel shall file a Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice, a Certificate of Good Standing signed by the Clerk of a United States District Court where admitted, and pay a fee of $75.00 (LR 83.01(d)). The application can be found on the website at http://www.tnmd.uscourts.gov/files/PHVMotForm.pdf. (ds) (Entered: 11/13/2014)
2014-11-13	4	NOTICE of Initial Case Management Conference set for 1/27/2015 at 10:30 AM before Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant. (ds) (Entered: 11/13/2014)
2014-11-14	5	RECEIPT #34675033951 in the amount of $400.00 for filing fee re 1 Complaint. (ds) (Entered: 11/14/2014)
2014-11-14	6	ORDER: This case is REFERRED to the Magistrate Judge for customized case management. Discovery is not stayed absent order of the District Judge. Signed by District Judge Todd J. Campbell on 11/14/2014. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.) (ds) (Entered: 11/14/2014)
2014-11-14	7	MOTION for attorney(s) Debra J. Wyman, Jason A. Forge to Appear Pro Hac Vice Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice for Debra J. Wyman and Jason A. Forge (paid $150 PHV fee; receipt number 0650-1878751) by Robbins, Geller, Rudman & Dowd, LLP. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment Proposed Order)(Wood, Christopher) (Entered: 11/14/2014)
2014-11-14	8	CERTIFICATE OF GOOD STANDING of Attorney Debra J. Wyman from the United States District Court for the Southern of California filed by Robbins, Geller, Rudman & Dowd, LLP. (Wood, Christopher) (Entered: 11/14/2014)
2014-11-14	9	CERTIFICATE OF GOOD STANDING of Attorney Jason A. Forge from the United States District Court for the Southern of California filed by Robbins, Geller, Rudman & Dowd, LLP. (Wood, Christopher) (Entered: 11/14/2014)
2014-11-18	10	ORDER granting 7 Motion for Debra J. Wyman and Jason A. Forge to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 11/17/2014. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.) (ds) (Entered: 11/18/2014)
2014-11-21	11	SUMMONS returned executed by Robbins, Geller, Rudman & Dowd, LLP. United States Securities and Exchange Commission served on 11/14/2014. (Wyman, Debra) (Entered: 11/21/2014)
2014-12-15	12	NOTICE of Appearance by Adam Grogg on behalf of All Defendants (Grogg, Adam) (Entered: 12/15/2014)
2014-12-15	13	ANSWER to 1 Complaint, by United States Securities and Exchange Commission.(Grogg, Adam) (Entered: 12/15/2014)
2014-12-16		BAR STATUS of Attorney Adam Grogg of DC verified as active as of this date. (ds) (Entered: 12/16/2014)
2015-01-13	14	Consent MOTION to Continue Initial Case Management Conference by United States Securities and Exchange Commission. (Grogg, Adam) (Entered: 01/13/2015)
2015-01-21	15	ORDER granting 14 Motion to Continue. The Initial Case Management Conference is rescheduled to February 18, 2015 at 10:00 a.m. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 1/21/2015. (ds) (Entered: 01/21/2015)
2015-01-29	16	MOTION for attorney(s) Michael Albert to Appear Pro Hac Vice Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice for Michael Albert (paid $75 PHV fee; receipt number 0650-1920880) by Robbins, Geller, Rudman & Dowd, LLP. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment Proposed Order)(Wood, Christopher) (Entered: 01/29/2015)
2015-01-29	17	CERTIFICATE OF GOOD STANDING of Attorney Michael Albert from the United States District Court for the Southern of California filed by Robbins, Geller, Rudman & Dowd, LLP. (Wood, Christopher) (Entered: 01/29/2015)
2015-01-30	18	ORDER granting 16 Motion for Michael Albert to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 1/30/2015. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.) (ds) (Entered: 01/30/2015)
2015-01-30		BAR STATUS of Attorney Michael Albert of CA verified as active as of this date. (ds) (Entered: 01/30/2015)
2015-02-13	19	PROPOSED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER filed by Robbins, Geller, Rudman & Dowd, LLP. (Wood, Christopher) (Entered: 02/13/2015)
2015-02-17	20	Consent MOTION for Leave to Leave to Participate in Initial Case Management Conference Via Phone by United States Securities and Exchange Commission. (Grogg, Adam) (Entered: 02/17/2015)
2015-02-18	21	ORDER granting 20 Motion for Leave to participate by telephone. (Bryant, John) (Entered: 02/18/2015)
2015-02-18		Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant: Initial Case Management Conference held on 2/18/2015. Order to enter. (Proceedings not recorded) (tm) (Entered: 02/19/2015)
2015-02-19	22	ORDER: The Initial Case Management Conference is RESET for 3/5/2015 at 9:30 AM before Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 2/19/2015. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.) (ds) (Entered: 02/19/2015)
2015-02-26	23	Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Supplement to Proposed Initial Case Management Order , Consent MOTION to Continue Case Management Conference by United States Securities and Exchange Commission. (Grogg, Adam) (Entered: 02/26/2015)
2015-02-27	24	ORDER granting 23 Motion for Extension of Time to File and 23 Motion to Continue Case Management Conference. Initial Case Management Conference rescheduled to March 17, 2015 at 10:00 a.m. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 2/27/2015. (ds) (Entered: 02/27/2015)
2015-03-09	25	SUPPLEMENT filed by Robbins, Geller, Rudman & Dowd, LLP re 19 Proposed Case Management Order. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment Appendix of Unpublished Authority)(Wood, Christopher) (Entered: 03/09/2015)
2015-03-09	26	SUPPLEMENT filed by United States Securities and Exchange Commission re 19 Proposed Case Management Order. (Grogg, Adam) (Entered: 03/09/2015)
2015-03-17		Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant: Case Management Conference held on 3/17/2015. (Tape #2015-4 JSB) (tm) (Entered: 03/17/2015)
2015-03-26	27	Transcript filed for date of March 17, 2015 before Judge John S. Bryant. Court Reporter/Transcriber: Roxann Harkins, 615-403-8314, roxann_harkins@tnmd.uscourts.gov. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF COUNSEL TO REVIEW THE TRANSCRIPT AND REQUEST REDACTION OF CONTENT CLASSIFIED AS PRIVATE UNDER THE NOTICE TO MEMBERS OF THE BAR, ELECTRONIC AVAILABILITY OF TRANSCRIPTS OF COURT PROCEEDINGS, EFFECTIVE MAY 5, 2008, AVAILABLE ON THE COURT'S WEBSITE UNDER THE CM-ECF LINK at: http://www.tnmd.uscourts.gov/files/20091201Notice_to_the_Bar_Transcripts.pdf. Intent to Request Transcript Redaction due 4/2/2015. Redaction Request due 4/16/2015. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 4/27/2015. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 6/24/2015. (RH) (Entered: 03/26/2015)
2015-03-27	28	REVISED Transcript filed for date of March 17, 2015 before Judge John S. Bryant. Court Reporter/Transcriber: Roxann Harkins, 615-403-8314, roxann_harkins@tnmd.uscourts.gov. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF COUNSEL TO REVIEW THE TRANSCRIPT AND REQUEST REDACTION OF CONTENT CLASSIFIED AS PRIVATE UNDER THE NOTICE TO MEMBERS OF THE BAR, ELECTRONIC AVAILABILITY OF TRANSCRIPTS OF COURT PROCEEDINGS, EFFECTIVE MAY 5, 2008, AVAILABLE ON THE COURT'S WEBSITE UNDER THE CM-ECF LINK at: http://www.tnmd.uscourts.gov/files/20091201Notice_to_the_Bar_Transcripts.pdf. Intent to Request Transcript Redaction due 4/3/2015. Redaction Request due 4/17/2015. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 4/27/2015. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 6/25/2015. (RH) (Entered: 03/27/2015)
2015-04-08	29	ORDER: Discovery due by 8/5/2015. Dispositive Motions due by 10/5/2015. Replies due by 11/16/2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 4/8/15. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(am) (Entered: 04/08/2015)
2015-04-28	30	MOTION for Summary Judgment by United States Securities and Exchange Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Declarations, # 2 Attachment Concise Statement of Facts, # 3 Attachment Appendix of Unpublished Authority)(Grogg, Adam) (Entered: 04/28/2015)
2015-05-01	31	MOTION to Set Schedule for Completion of Briefing on Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment on FOIA Exemption 7(A) by Robbins, Geller, Rudman & Dowd, LLP. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment Memorandum of Points and Authorities In Support of Motion, # 2 Attachment Proposed Order on Motion)(Wood, Christopher) (Entered: 05/01/2015)
2015-05-01	32	NOTICE of Appearance by Jerry E. Martin on behalf of Robbins, Geller, Rudman & Dowd, LLP (Martin, Jerry) (Entered: 05/01/2015)
2015-05-04		Bar status for attorney Jerry E. Martin of TN verified as active this date. (dt) (Entered: 05/04/2015)
2015-05-06	33	RESPONSE in Opposition re 31 MOTION to Set Schedule for Completion of Briefing on Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment on FOIA Exemption 7(A) filed by United States Securities and Exchange Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment (Appendix of Unpublished Authority))(Grogg, Adam) (Entered: 05/06/2015)
2015-05-07		Note to Filer, Adam Grogg, re DE# 33 : Pursuant to Local Rule 5.01, Certificates of Service shall identify by name the person served, what was served, the method of service, and date of service. Please FILE a conformed Certificate of Service for this document. (dt) (Entered: 05/07/2015)
2015-05-07	34	CERTIFICATE Certificate of Service filed by United States Securities and Exchange Commission re 33 Response in Opposition to Motion, filed by United States Securities and Exchange Commission. (Grogg, Adam) (Entered: 05/07/2015)
2015-05-07		Bar status for attorney Adam Grogg of NY verified as active this date.. (dt) (Entered: 05/07/2015)
2015-05-08	35	ORDER granting in part and denying in part 31 Motion for Summary Judgment. In the exercise of the Courts discretion to order discovery and the progress of this case, the undersigned Magistrate Judge finds that Plaintiffs motion should be GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Plaintiffs request for leave to file a motion pursuant to Rule 56(d) on or before May 19, 2015, is GRANTED. To the extent that Plaintiff seeks the imposition of further deadlines for responding to Defendants motion for summary judgment, Plaintiffs motion is DENIED. Briefing deadlines regarding Defendants pending motion for summary judgment shall be set by the Court at a later time. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 5/8/15. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(am) Modified on 5/11/2015 (am). (Entered: 05/08/2015)
2015-05-14	36	ORDER: Exhibit List due by 3/7/2016. Witness List due by 3/7/2016. Proposed Pretrial Order due by 3/7/2016. Bench Trial set for 3/22/2016 at 09:00 AM before District Judge Todd J. Campbell. Pretrial Conference set for 3/14/2016 at 10:30 AM before District Judge Todd J. Campbell. Signed by District Judge Todd J. Campbell on 5/14/15. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(am) Modified on 5/15/2015 (am). (Entered: 05/14/2015)
2015-05-19	37	MOTION for Discovery Plaintiff's Notice of Motion and Motion for Limited Discovery Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d) by Robbins, Geller, Rudman & Dowd, LLP. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment Proposed Order)(Wood, Christopher) (Entered: 05/19/2015)
2015-05-19	38	MEMORANDUM in Support of 37 MOTION for Discovery Plaintiff's Notice of Motion and Motion for Limited Discovery Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d) filed by Robbins, Geller, Rudman & Dowd, LLP Plaintiff's Memorandum In Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Limited Discovery Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d) . (Attachments: # 1 Attachment Declaration of Christopher M. Wood, # 2 Exhibit Exhibit A to Wood Declaration (OIG Report), # 3 Exhibit Exhibit B to Wood Declaration (April 2012 New York Times article), # 4 Exhibit Exhibit C to Wood Declaration (Walmart's Response Statement), # 5 Exhibit Exhibit D to Wood Declaration (Excerpts from 10-Q June 2012), # 6 Exhibit Exhibit E to Wood Declaration (December 2012 New York Times article), # 7 Exhibit Exhibit F to Wood Declaration (Letter from Reps Cummings and Waxman January 2013), # 8 Exhibit Exhibit G to Wood Declaration (Email from Mars to Senser October 2005), # 9 Exhibit Exhibit H to Wood Declaration (CMC Hearing Transcript March 2015), # 10 Exhibit Exhibit I to Wood Declaration (Excerpts from Amended 10-Q October 2013), # 11 Attachment Declaration of Jason A. Forge, # 12 Attachment Declaration of Jerry E. Martin)(Wood, Christopher) (Entered: 05/19/2015)
2015-05-19	39	APPENDIX filed by Robbins, Geller, Rudman & Dowd, LLP re 38 Memorandum in Support,,,,,. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment Tab 1 - Careolive, # 2 Attachment Tab 2 - City of Chicago, # 3 Attachment Tab 3 - Ford Motor Co., # 4 Attachment Tab 4 - Gavin 1, # 5 Attachment Tab 5 - Gavin 2, # 6 Attachment Tab 6 - Gray, Plant, Mooty, # 7 Attachment Tab 7 - Martinez 1, # 8 Attachment Tab 8 - Martinez 2, # 9 Attachment Tab 9 - Milton H. Green Archives, # 10 Attachment Tab 10 - Pac. Fisheries Inc, # 11 Attachment Tab 11 - Ralston Purina Co, # 12 Attachment Tab 12 - Ramirez-Mendoza, # 13 Attachment Tab 13 - Rosenfeld, # 14 Attachment Tab 14 - Shearson, # 15 Attachment Tab 15 - Williams)(Wood, Christopher) (Entered: 05/19/2015)
2015-05-26	40	MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 37 MOTION for Discovery Plaintiff's Notice of Motion and Motion for Limited Discovery Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d) (Unopposed) by United States Securities and Exchange Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment Proposed Order)(Grogg, Adam) (Entered: 05/26/2015)
2015-05-27	41	ORDER granting 40 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response to 37 MOTION for Discovery Plaintiff's Notice of Motion and Motion for Limited Discovery Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d). Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 5/27/15. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt) (Entered: 05/27/2015)
2015-06-12	42	NOTICE of Appearance by Kathryn C. Davis on behalf of United States Securities and Exchange Commission (Davis, Kathryn) (Entered: 06/12/2015)
2015-06-12	43	RESPONSE in Opposition re 37 MOTION for Discovery Plaintiff's Notice of Motion and Motion for Limited Discovery Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d) filed by United States Securities and Exchange Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment Appendix of Unpublished Authority)(Davis, Kathryn) (Entered: 06/12/2015)
2015-06-15		Bar status for attorney Kathryn C. Davis of DC verified as active this date. (dt) (Entered: 06/15/2015)
2015-10-28	44	ORDER: The Plaintiff's Motion for Limited Discovery Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d) 37 is DENIED insofar as it seeks discovery, and the Defendant is ORDERED to file supplemental declarations addressing (1) the segregability procedure utilized in responding to the Plaintiff's FOIA request and (2) the deficiencies in Mr. Helou's declaration. The supplemental declarations must be filed by Monday, November 9, 2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 10/28/2015. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(jw) (Entered: 10/28/2015)
2015-11-09	45	NOTICE of Filing by United States Securities and Exchange Commission re 44 Order on Motion for Discovery,, (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Supplemental Scott Decl.)(Grogg, Adam) (Entered: 11/09/2015)
2015-11-16	46	MOTION for Reconsideration re 44 Order on Motion for Discovery,, by Robbins, Geller, Rudman & Dowd, LLP. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment Text of Proposed Order)(Wood, Christopher) (Entered: 11/16/2015)
2015-11-16	47	MEMORANDUM in Support of 46 MOTION for Reconsideration re 44 Order on Motion for Discovery,, filed by Robbins, Geller, Rudman & Dowd, LLP . (Wood, Christopher) (Entered: 11/16/2015)
2015-11-16	48	APPENDIX filed by Robbins, Geller, Rudman & Dowd, LLP re 47 Memorandum in Support. (Wood, Christopher) (Entered: 11/16/2015)
2015-12-03	49	RESPONSE in Opposition re 46 MOTION for Reconsideration re 44 Order on Motion for Discovery,, filed by United States Securities and Exchange Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment Appendix of Unpublished Authority)(Grogg, Adam) (Entered: 12/03/2015)
2015-12-18	50	MOTION for Leave to re 49 Response in Opposition to Motion, 46 MOTION for Reconsideration re 44 Order on Motion for Discovery,, Motion for Leave to File a Reply Memorandum in Further Support of Motion for Reconsideration by Robbins, Geller, Rudman & Dowd, LLP. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Reply Memorandum in Further Support of Motion for Reconsideration, # 2 Exhibit B - Appendix of Unpublished Authorities, # 3 Attachment - Proposed Order)(Wood, Christopher) (Entered: 12/18/2015)
2015-12-22	51	ORDER granting 50 Motion for Leave to File a Reply. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 12/22/15. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt) (Entered: 12/22/2015)
2015-12-22	52	REPLY to Response to 46 MOTION for Reconsideration filed by Robbins, Geller, Rudman & Dowd, LLP. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment - Appendix of Unpublished Authorities)(dt) (Entered: 12/22/2015)
2016-01-04	53	MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: Before the Court is the Plaintiff's Notice of Motion and Motion for Reconsideration. (Docket Entry 46). The motion is GRANTED insofar as it requests reconsideration of the Order dated October 28, 2015 (Docket Entry 44) and DENIED to the extent that it seeks discovery, a denial of the Defendant's pending Motion for Summary Judgment, and oral argument regarding the Notice of Motion and Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 1/4/2016. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(jw) (Entered: 01/04/2016)
2016-01-25	54	RESPONSE in Opposition re 30 MOTION for Summary Judgment Plaintiff's Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Robbins, Geller, Rudman & Dowd, LLP. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment Plaintiff's Response to Defendant's Concise Statement of Facts in Support of Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment on FOIA Exemption 7(A), # 2 Attachment Appendix of Non-Published cases)(Wood, Christopher) (Entered: 01/25/2016)
2016-01-26	55	Joint MOTION to Continue Trial Date and Pre-Trial Deadlines by United States Securities and Exchange Commission. (Grogg, Adam) (Entered: 01/26/2016)
2016-01-28	56	ORDER: Exhibit List and Witness List due by 9/19/2016. Joint Proposed Discovery due by 9/19/2016. Bench Trial set for 10/4/2016 at 9:00 AM before District Judge Todd J. Campbell. Pretrial Conference set for 9/26/2016 at 9:00 AM before District Judge Todd J. Campbell. Signed by District Judge Todd J. Campbell on 1/28/2016. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(jw) (Entered: 01/28/2016)
2016-02-08	57	REPLY to Response to Motion re 30 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by United States Securities and Exchange Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment Appendix of Unpublished Authority)(Grogg, Adam) (Entered: 02/08/2016)
2016-03-12	58	MEMORANDUM OPINION OF THE COURT. Signed by District Judge Todd J. Campbell on 3/12/2016. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(jw) (Entered: 03/14/2016)
2016-03-12	59	ORDER: Pending before the Court is Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment on Freedom of Information Act Exemption 7(A). For the reasons stated in the accompanying memorandum opinion, the Court will GRANT Defendant's motion. The Clerk is directed to close the file, and any pending Motions are denied as moot. The pretrial conference on September 26, 2016 and the trial set for October 4, 2016 are canceled. This Order shall constitute the final judgment in this case pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58. Signed by District Judge Todd J. Campbell on 3/12/2016. (jw) (Entered: 03/14/2016)
2016-03-14	60	Entry of Judgment re 59 Order. (jw) (Entered: 03/14/2016)
Hide Docket Events