Case Detail

FOIA Project Annotation: A federal court in Virginia has ruled that Joseph Schmitz failed to exhaust his administrative remedies when he failed to file an administrative appeal in response to three separate but related FOIA requests he made to the Office of the Inspector General at the Department of Defense concerning the Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure Cloud Procurement. Schmitz, a former Inspector General at DOD, submitted his first FOIA request in June 2020. He corresponded with the agency concerning the scope of the request. The agency responded in August 2020, releasing a 22-page document entitled "Report of Investigation" with redactions. Schmitz did not file an administrative appeal of the agency's response. He submitted a second FOIA request in August 2020. The agency responded to that request in October 2020, releasing a 7-page document with redactions. Schmitz did not file an administrative appeal of that request either. Schmitz then filed a third FOIA request in December 2020. The agency responded to Schmitz's third FOIA request in January 2021, disclosing 74 pages of interview transcripts with redactions. The agency referred to this response as an "interim response" and told Schmitz he could file an appeal. He did not file an administrative appeal of the third FOIA request either. The agency disclosed an additional 89 page in February 2021. Instead, Schmitz filed suit, alleging the agency had failed to respond properly to any of his three requests. In response to Schmitz's FOIA litigation, DOD argued that his suit should be dismissed because he had failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. Judge T.S. Ellis initially noted that "it is undisputed that plaintiff has failed to exhaust his administrative remedies relating to any of his three FOIA requests, as required by the statute." However, Schmitz argued that the exhaustion doctrine was not applicable here because exhaustion was a prudential requirement, not a jurisdictional one; that appealing the denials would have been futile; and that the production of additional records in the course of the litigation moots the exhaustion requirement. Schmitz contended that requiring him to file administrative appeals would frustrate the purposes of FOIA. Ellis noted that his argument "proves too much. Every denial of a FOIA request, from the requestor's point of view, is a frustration of the purposes of FOIA and hence, by this argument, exhaustion would never be required." Ellis observed that "a waiver of the exhaustion requirement is particularly inappropriate in this case because plaintiff's primary challenges to DoD OIG's FOIA responses centers on the propriety of certain DoD OIG redactions made to responsive records. The issue of redactions is particularly well-suited to review through an agency appeal. But because plaintiff failed to file an administrative appeal to any of his FOIA requests, the agency has not had a chance to respond to plaintiff's challenges of these redactions. Accordingly, no record regarding these redactions has been compiled for judicial review." Ellis also rejected Schmitz's claim that an appeal would have been futile. Instead, he observed that "plaintiff has not identified any record evidence suggesting that an appeal to DoD's ultimate decision maker was certain to reach an adverse decision regarding the documents produced or the propriety of any redactions. To the contrary, the record evidence suggests that the DoD OIG employees assigned to review plaintiff's initial FOIA requests worked with plaintiff for months to identify documents responsive to those requests." As to Schmitz's argument that the exhaustion requirement was moot because of other released documents, Ellis noted that "this argument improperly imputes the actions of DoD OSD/JS, a defendant already dismissed from this suit by joint stipulation, to DoD OIG, the sole defendant remaining in this action. Although plaintiff is correct that the D.C. Circuit has held that the government's decision to disclose documents in the course of litigation can moot the exhaustion requirement, plaintiff's argument fails to acknowledge that there are two different DoD subagencies â€" DoD OIG and DoD OSD/S â€" involved in this litigation. It is DoD OIG who is raising the exhaustion defense, and there is no evidence in the record that DoD OIG has produced any new documents to plaintiff in the course of this litigation."
Issues: Litigation - Jurisdiction - Failure to Exhaust

Date Filed	Doc #	Docket Text
2021-04-02	1	Complaint Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief ( Filing fee $ 402, receipt number 0422-7705299.), filed by Joseph E. Schmitz. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit)(Kirk, Dennis) (Entered: 04/02/2021)
2021-04-02		Initial Case Assignment to District Judge T. S. Ellis, III and Magistrate Judge Michael S. Nachmanoff. (dvanm, ) (Entered: 04/06/2021)
2021-04-05	2	Civil Cover Sheet re 1 Complaint 1:21-vc-0415 by Joseph E. Schmitz. (Attachments: # 1 Summons, DoD OIG, # 2 Summons, DoD)(Kirk, Dennis) (Entered: 04/05/2021)
2021-04-05	3	Proposed Summons by Joseph E. Schmitz. (Attachments: # 1 Summons, US ATTY GEN, # 2 Summons, DoD OIG, # 3 Summons, DoD, # 4 Summons, US Attorney, ED VA, # 5 Dennis Dean Kirk, Appearance of Counsel)(Kirk, Dennis) (Entered: 04/05/2021)
2021-04-06	4	Summons Issued as to U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General NOTICE TO ATTORNEY: Print out two electronically issued summons and one copy of the attachments for each defendant to be served with the complaint. (Attachments: # 1 Notice)(dvanm, ) (Entered: 04/06/2021)
2021-05-07	5	Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer by U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 05/07/2021)
2021-05-07	6	NOTICE of Appearance by Hugham Chan on behalf of U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General (Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 05/07/2021)
2021-05-10	7	ORDER granting 5 Motion for an Enlargement of Time to Respond to the Complaint. U.S. Department of Defense answer due 6/1/2021; U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General answer due 6/1/2021. Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 05/7/2021. (dvanm, ) (Entered: 05/10/2021)
2021-05-11	8	CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Joseph E. Schmitz Certificate of Service (Attachments: # 1 Summons, US ATTY EDVA, # 2 Summons, DoD OIG)(Kirk, Dennis) (Entered: 05/11/2021)
2021-05-11	9	CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Joseph E. Schmitz (Attachments: # 1 Summons, US ATTY GEN)(Kirk, Dennis) (Entered: 05/11/2021)
2021-06-01	10	ANSWER to Complaint by U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General.(Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 06/01/2021)
2021-06-02	11	SCHEDULING ORDER: Initial Pretrial Conference set for 7/7/2021 at 11:00 AM in Alexandria Courtroom 400 before Magistrate Judge Michael S. Nachmanoff. Discovery due by 10/15/2021. Final Pretrial Conference set for 11/18/2021 at 04:30 PM in Alexandria Courtroom 900 before District Judge T. S. Ellis III (If the parties do not file dispositive motions). Final Pretrial Conference set for 1/6/2022 at 04:00 PM in Alexandria Courtroom 900 before District Judge T. S. Ellis III (If the parties do file dispositive motions). Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 06/02/2021. (Attachments: # 1 Magistrate Consent Form, # 2 Pretrial Notice) (tran) (Entered: 06/02/2021)
2021-06-10	12	NOTICE of Appearance by Dennis Dean Kirk on behalf of Joseph E. Schmitz (Attachments: # 1 Errata Notices of Co-Counsel Appearances)(Kirk, Dennis) (Entered: 06/10/2021)
2021-06-14	13	AMENDED Complaint ( Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AVAEDC-7841018.), filed by Joseph E. Schmitz. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit EXHIBIT A, Amended Complaint, # 2 Exhibit EXHIBIT B, Amended Complaint, # 3 Exhibit EXHIBIT C, Amended Complaint, # 4 Exhibit EXHIBIT D, Amended Complaint)(Kirk, Dennis) Modified to correct event name on 6/15/2021 (dvanm, ). (Entered: 06/14/2021)
2021-06-15	14	MOTION to Vacate the Initial Scheduling Order and for Entry of an Order Seeking Proposed Summary Judgment Briefing Schedule by U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General. (Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 06/15/2021)
2021-06-15	15	Memorandum in Support re 14 MOTION to Vacate the Initial Scheduling Order and for Entry of an Order Seeking Proposed Summary Judgment Briefing Schedule filed by U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit, # 4 Proposed Order)(Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 06/15/2021)
2021-06-15	16	NOTICE by U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General of Waiver of Hearing (Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 06/15/2021)
2021-06-15	17	ORDER granting in part and denying in part 14 Motion to Vacate Initial Scheduling Order. The Motion is granted insofar as the court's initial scheduling order 11 is vacated. The motion is denied in all other respects. Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 06/15/2021. (see order for details) (dvanm, )( VACATED per Order dated 7/13/2021 ) Modified on 7/14/2021 (swil). (Entered: 06/16/2021)
2021-06-18	18	MOTION to Strike Plaintiff's Supplemental Complaint by U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General. (Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 06/18/2021)
2021-06-18	19	Memorandum in Support re 18 MOTION to Strike Plaintiff's Supplemental Complaint filed by U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General. (Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 06/18/2021)
2021-06-18	20	Notice of Hearing Date re 18 MOTION to Strike Plaintiff's Supplemental Complaint (Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 06/18/2021)
2021-06-21	21	ORDER rescheduling hearing on defendant's motion to strike plaintiff's supplemental complaint. The hearing is rescheduled for July 9, 2021 at 11:00 a.m. Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 06/21/2021. (see order for details)(dvanm, ) (Entered: 06/21/2021)
2021-06-21		Reset Deadlines as to 18 MOTION to Strike Plaintiff's Supplemental Complaint . Motion Hearing set for 7/9/2021 at 11:00 AM in Alexandria Courtroom 900 before District Judge T. S. Ellis III. (dvanm, ) (Entered: 06/21/2021)
2021-06-28	22	NOTICE by U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General re 13 Complaint, of Filing of Conditional Answer to Purported First Amended Complaint (Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 06/28/2021)
2021-06-30		Initial Pretrial Conference set for 07/07/2021 at 11:00 AM in Alexandria Courtroom 400 before Magistrate Judge Michael S. Nachmanoff TERMINATED (per MSN Chambers). (lcre, ) (Entered: 06/30/2021)
2021-07-02	23	Opposition Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Strike filed by Joseph E. Schmitz. (Kirk, Dennis) (Entered: 07/02/2021)
2021-07-07	24	NOTICE of Appearance by Philip James O'Beirne on behalf of Joseph E. Schmitz (O'Beirne, Philip) (Entered: 07/07/2021)
2021-07-08	25	Reply to Motion re 18 MOTION to Strike Plaintiff's Supplemental Complaint filed by U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General. (Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 07/08/2021)
2021-07-09	26	Minute Entry for proceedings held before District Judge T. S. Ellis, III: Motion Hearing held on 7/9/2021 re 18 MOTION to Strike Plaintiff's Supplemental Complaint filed by U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General. Dennis Kirk, Philip O'Beirne and plaintiff, Hon. Joseph E. Schmitz appeared on behalf of the plaintiff. Hugham Chan appeared on behalf of the defendant. Matter argued. Parties to submit agreement by 5:00 p.m. on Monday, July 12, 2021. Order to follow. Court Reporter: R. Stonestreet (tran) (Entered: 07/09/2021)
2021-07-09	27	ORDERED that the parties are DIRECTED to file any draft consent order resolving defendants' motion to strike by Monday, July 12, 2021 at 5:00 p.m. The parties are further DIRECTED to inform the Court if there are any matters left unresolved at that time. Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 7/9/2021. (dest) (Entered: 07/09/2021)
2021-07-12	28	NOTICE by U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General re 27 Order, Joint Proposed Consent Order (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 07/12/2021)
2021-07-13		Set Hearings: Status Conference set for 7/13/2021 at 04:00 PM in Alexandria Telephonically before District Judge T. S. Ellis III. (tran) (Entered: 07/13/2021)
2021-07-13	29	ORDERED that a telephonic hearing is SCHEDULED for Tuesday, July 13, 2021 at 4:00 p.m. on the parties' proposed Consent Order. It further ORDERED that the parties are DIRECTED to comply with the Courtroom Deputy's instructions regarding the procedure for participation in the telephonic hearing. Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 07/13/2021. (tran) (Entered: 07/13/2021)
2021-07-13	30	Minute Entry for proceedings held before District Judge T. S. Ellis, III: Telephonic Status Conference held on 7/13/2021. Dennis Kirk, Philip O'Beirne and Nicholas Leaver (Paralegal) appeared on behalf of the plaintiff. Hugham Chan appeared on behalf of the defendant. Matter briefed. Court will vacate June 15, 2021 order and briefing schedule. Gov't will begin production on 09/20/2021, then next on 10/22/2021 then on 11/12/2021. If additional production is needed, the Court will set a hearing. The Vaughn Index to be filed by 11/12/2021 which will cover all documents in response to the 04/05/2021 request. Dates will be subject to revisions due to changing circumstances. The Court advised the parties that there will be a single summary judgment based on the vaughn index. Order to follow. Court Reporter: J. Egal (tran) (Main Document 30 replaced on 7/14/2021) (tran, ). Modified on 7/14/2021 (tran). (Entered: 07/13/2021)
2021-07-13	31	ORDERED that defendants' Motion to Strike Dkt. 18 is WITHDRAWN . It is further ORDERED that leave to file the First Amended Complaint Dkt. 13 is GRANTED and deemed FILED as of this date. It is further ORDERED that the Court's June 15, 2021 Order setting a summary judgment briefing schedule Dkt. 17 is VACATED . It is further ORDERED that Defendant Department of Defense shall provide a status report on or before Friday, August 13, 2021 at 5:00 p.m. It is further ORDERED that Defendant Department of Defense shall start producing said responsive records, if any, to plaintiff on or before Monday, September 20, 2021, and additional productions, if any, shall be made thereafter on October 22, 2021 and November 12, 2021. It is further ORDERED that Defendant Department of Defense will provide plaintiff with a Vaughn Index covering all documents related to the April 5, 2021 Request by November 12, 2021. It is further ORDERED that the parties shall file any motions for summary judgment by December 1, 2021 at 5:00 p.m. The local rules shall govern subsequent briefing. A hearing will be scheduled thereafter if necessary. Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 7/13/2021. (see Order for further details) (swil) (Entered: 07/14/2021)
2021-08-11	32	NOTICE by U.S. Department of Defense of Status Report (Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 08/11/2021)
2021-08-20	33	Request for Hearing by Joseph E. Schmitz (Attachments: # 1 Motion to Modify Production Schedule, # 2 Memorandum in Support of Motion)(Kirk, Dennis) (Entered: 08/20/2021)
2021-08-20	34	MOTION Motion to Modify Production Schedule re 33 Request for Hearing by Joseph E. Schmitz. (Kirk, Dennis) (Entered: 08/20/2021)
2021-08-20	35	Memorandum in Support re 34 MOTION Motion to Modify Production Schedule re 33 Request for Hearing filed by Joseph E. Schmitz. (Kirk, Dennis) (Entered: 08/20/2021)
2021-08-20		Set Deadlines as to 34 MOTION Motion to Modify Production Schedule re 33 Request for Hearing . Motion Hearing set for 8/27/2021 at 10:00 AM in Alexandria Courtroom 900 before District Judge T. S. Ellis III. (clar, ) (Entered: 08/23/2021)
2021-08-23	36	Notice of Hearing Date set for 09/10/2021 re 34 MOTION Motion to Modify Production Schedule re 33 Request for Hearing (O'Beirne, Philip) (Entered: 08/23/2021)
2021-08-23		Reset Deadlines as to 34 MOTION Motion to Modify Production Schedule re 33 Request for Hearing . Motion Hearing set for 9/10/2021 at 10:00 AM in Alexandria Courtroom 900 before District Judge T. S. Ellis III. (clar, ) (Entered: 08/24/2021)
2021-09-03	37	Memorandum in Opposition re 34 MOTION Motion to Modify Production Schedule re 33 Request for Hearing filed by U.S. Department of Defense. (Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 09/03/2021)
2021-09-07	38	NOTICE of Appearance by Jed Wulfekotte on behalf of Joseph E. Schmitz (Wulfekotte, Jed) (Entered: 09/07/2021)
2021-09-08	39	REPLY to Response to Motion re 34 MOTION Motion to Modify Production Schedule re 33 Request for Hearing filed by Joseph E. Schmitz. (Kirk, Dennis) (Entered: 09/08/2021)
2021-09-09		Reset Deadlines as to 34 MOTION Motion to Modify Production Schedule re 33 Request for Hearing . Motion Hearing reset for 9/17/2021 at 01:00 PM in Alexandria Courtroom 900 before District Judge T. S. Ellis III. (tran) (Entered: 09/09/2021)
2021-09-17	40	Minute Entry for proceedings held before District Judge T. S. Ellis, III: Motion Hearing held on 9/17/2021 re 34 MOTION Motion to Modify Production Schedule re 33 Request for Hearing filed by Joseph E. Schmitz. Dennis Kirk, Philip O'Beirne, Jed Wulfekotte and Hon. Joseph E. Schmitz appeared on behalf of the plaintiff. Hugham Chan appeared on behalf of the defendant. Matter argued. Order to follow. Court Reporter: R. Stonestreet (tran) (Entered: 09/17/2021)
2021-09-30	41	ORDERED that the plaintiff's motion to modify the production schedule 34 is GRANTED the production schedule is MODIFIED, and the Defendant Department of Defense shall produce the 126 responsive documents to plaintiff on or before Friday, October 29, 2021. It is further ORDERED that Defendant Department of Defense will provide plaintiff with a Vaughn index covering those documents on or before Friday, October 29, 2021. Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 09/30/2021. (dvanm, ) (Entered: 10/01/2021)
2021-11-03	42	TRANSCRIPT of proceedings held on September 17, 2021, before Judge T.S. Ellis, III, Court Reporter/Transcriber Rebecca Stonestreet, Telephone number 240-426-7767. NOTICE RE REDACTION OF TRANSCRIPTS: The parties have thirty(30) calendar days to file with the Court a Notice of Intent to Request Redaction of this transcript. If no such Notice is filed, the transcript will be made remotely electronically available to the public without redaction after 90 calendar days. The policy is located on our website at www.vaed.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 Redaction Request due 12/3/2021. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 1/3/2022. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 2/1/2022.(stonestreet, rachel) (Entered: 11/03/2021)
2021-11-08		Case Reassigned to Magistrate Judge Theresa Carroll Buchanan. Magistrate Judge Michael S. (MJ)Nachmanoff no longer assigned to the case. (jlan) (Entered: 11/08/2021)
2021-11-23	43	NOTICE by U.S. Department of Defense of Joint Stipulation of Partial Dismissal (Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 11/23/2021)
2021-11-23	44	Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File for Summary Judgment by U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 11/23/2021)
2021-11-23	45	ORDER granting the 44 Joint Motion for an Enlargement of Time to File for Summary Judgment. The time in which Defendant Department of Defense Office of Inspector General may file summary judgment is enlarged to January 31, 2022. Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 11/23/2021. (dvanm, ) (Entered: 11/23/2021)
2021-11-23	46	So Ordered in re 43 NOTICE filed by U.S. Department of Defense. Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 11/23/2021. (jlan) (Entered: 11/24/2021)
2021-12-27	47	ORDERED that the final pretrial conference scheduled for January 6, 2022 is POSTPONED pending further Order of the Court. Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 12/27/2021. (dvanm) (Entered: 12/27/2021)
2022-01-25	48	Consent MOTION for Extension by U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 01/25/2022)
2022-01-25	49	ORDER granting 48 the Consent Motion for an Enlargement of Time to File for Summary Judgment, and for good cause shown, it is hereby ORDERED that the time in which Defendant Department of Defense Office of Inspector General may file summary judgment is enlarged to February 15, 2022. Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 01/25/2022. (dvanm) (Entered: 01/25/2022)
2022-02-15	50	MOTION for Summary Judgment by U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General. (Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 02/15/2022)
2022-02-15	51	Memorandum in Support re 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Dorgan Declaration)(Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 02/15/2022)
2022-02-15	52	NOTICE by U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General of Waiver of Hearing (Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 02/15/2022)
2022-03-01	53	Memorandum in Opposition re 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Joseph E. Schmitz. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4)(O'Beirne, Philip) (Entered: 03/01/2022)
2022-03-01	54	Notice of Hearing Date set for 03/18/2022 re 53 Memorandum in Opposition (O'Beirne, Philip) (Entered: 03/01/2022)
2022-03-02	55	Notice of Hearing Date Corrected set for 03/18/2022 re 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment (O'Beirne, Philip) (Entered: 03/02/2022)
2022-03-02		Set Deadlines as to 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment . Motion Hearing set for 3/18/2022 at 10:00 AM in Alexandria Courtroom 900 before District Judge T. S. Ellis III. (clar, ) (Entered: 03/03/2022)
2022-03-07	56	Reply to Motion re 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Supplemental Dorgan Declaration)(Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 03/07/2022)
2022-03-15	57	MOTION for Leave to File Surreply by Joseph E. Schmitz. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Proposed Surreply)(O'Beirne, Philip) (Entered: 03/15/2022)
2022-03-15	58	ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for leave to file a sur-reply in opposition to defendant's motion for summary judgment 57 is GRANTED . It is further ORDERED that the government may file a response to plaintiff's sur-reply no later than Tuesday, March 22, 2022 at 12:00 p.m. It is further ORDERED that the hearing presently scheduled for Friday, March 18, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. is RESCHEDULED to Friday, March 25, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 03/15/2022. (tran) (Entered: 03/15/2022)
2022-03-15		Reset Hearing as to 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment . Motion Hearing reset for 3/25/2022 at 10:00 AM in Alexandria Courtroom 900 before District Judge T. S. Ellis III. (tran) (Entered: 03/15/2022)
2022-03-16	59	Consent MOTION to Continue Summary Judgment Hearing by U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 03/16/2022)
2022-03-16	60	ORDERED that the defendant's consent motion to continue the summary judgment hearing (Dkt. 59) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. It is further ORDERED that the hearing presently scheduled for 10:00 a.m. on March 25, 2022 will be CONTINUED until 1:30 p.m. on Friday, March 25, 2022 . Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 3/16/2022. (dvanm) (Entered: 03/18/2022)
2022-03-22	61	ORDERED that the motion hearing in this matter presently scheduled for Friday, March 25, 2022 will be POSTPONED . The hearing will now occur telephonically on Friday, May 6, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 3/22/2022. (dvanm) (Entered: 03/22/2022)
2022-03-22		Reset Deadlines as to 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment . Motion Hearing set for 5/6/2022 at 10:00 AM in Alexandria Telephonically before District Judge T. S. Ellis III. (dvanm) (Entered: 03/22/2022)
2022-03-22	62	MOTION for Enlargement of Time Nunc Pro Tunc to Respond to Plaintiff's Surreply by U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 03/22/2022)
2022-03-22	63	Response to 57 MOTION for Leave to File Surreply filed by U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General. (Chan, Hugham) (Entered: 03/22/2022)
2022-03-22	64	ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED and the Response to the Surreply may be filed on or before 5:00 p.m. on March 22, 2022. Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 03/22/2022. (tran) (Entered: 03/22/2022)
2022-04-29		Set Deadlines as to 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment . Motion Hearing set for 5/6/2022 at 10:00 AM in Alexandria Telephonically before District Judge T. S. Ellis III. (tran) (Entered: 04/29/2022)
2022-05-05		Reset Hearing as to 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment . Motion Hearing reset for 5/6/2022 at 11:00 AM in Alexandria Telephonically before District Judge T. S. Ellis III. (tran) (Entered: 05/05/2022)
2022-05-06	65	Minute Entry for proceedings held before District Judge T. S. Ellis, III: Motion Hearing held on 5/6/2022 (Telephonically) re 50 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General. Dennis Kirk, Philip O'Beirne, Jed Wulfekotte and John Missner appeared on behalf of the plaintiff. Hugham Chan appeared on behalf of the defendant. Matter argued and taken under advisement. Order to follow. Court Reporter: R. Stonestreet (tran) (Entered: 05/06/2022)
2022-05-18	66	MEMORANDUM OPINION re 50 Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 5/18/2022. (dvanm) (Entered: 05/18/2022)
2022-05-18	67	ORDER granting 50 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by District Judge T. S. Ellis, III on 05/18/2022. (dvanm) (Entered: 05/18/2022)
Hide Docket Events