Skip to content

Judicial Watch • JW v. IRS Lerner Email Hearing Transcript 01559

JW v. IRS Lerner Email Hearing Transcript 01559

JW v. IRS Lerner Email Hearing Transcript 01559

Page 1: JW v. IRS Lerner Email Hearing Transcript 01559

Category:IRS Scandal

Number of Pages:20

Date Created:July 29, 2015

Date Uploaded to the Library:July 29, 2015

Tags:klimas, 072915, sheets, Clearwell, cotca, honor, Internal, Revenue, courts, order, email, service, documents, FOIA, Washington, court, IRS


File Scanned for Malware

Donate now to keep these documents public!

  • demand_answers

See Generated Text   ˅

Autogenerated text from PDF

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT COLUMBIA
JUDICIAL WATCH, INC.,
Plaintiff,
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE,
Defendant.
Civil Action
No. 13-1559
July 29, 2015
10:55 a.m.
Washington, D.C.
TRANSCRIPT STATUS CALL PROCEEDINGS
BEFORE THE HONORABLE EMMET SULLIVAN,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
APPEARANCES:
For the Plaintiff:
Ramona Raula Cotca, Esq.
JUDICIAL WATCH, INC.
425 Third Street,
Suite 800
Washington, 20024
(202) 646-5172, 328
Fax: (202) 646-5199
Email: Rcotca@judicialwatch.org
Paul Orfanedes, Esq.
JUDICIAL WATCH, INC.
425 Third Street,
Suite 800
Washington, 20024
(202) 646-5172
Fax: (202) 646-5199
Email: Porfanedes@judicialwatch.org
For the Defendant: sheets
Geoffrey John Klimas, Trial Attorney
U.S. DEPARTMENT JUSTICE
P.O. Box 227
Washington, 20044
(202) 307-6346
Email: Geoffrey.j.klimas@usdoj.gov
07/29/2015 04:08:16
APPEARANCES:
Cont.
For the Defendant:
Stephanie Ann Sasarak, Trial
Attorney
U.S. DEPARTMENT JUSTICE
Tax Division
P.O. Box 227
Washington, 20044
(202) 307-2089
Fax: (202) 514-6866
Email: Stephanie.a.sasarak@usdoj.gov
Carmen Banerjee, Trial Attorney
U.S. DEPARTMENT JUSTICE
Tax Division Civil Trial Section
555 Fourth Street,
Suite 6810
Washington, 20001
(202) 307-6423
Email: Carmen.m.banerjee@usdoj.gov
Court Reporter:Scott Wallace, RDR, CRR
Official Court Reporter
Room 6503, U.S. Courthouse
Washington, D.C. 20001
202.354.3196
scottlyn01@aol.com
Proceedings reported machine shorthand, transcript produced computer-aided transcription.
07/29/2015 04:08:16 sheets
MORNING SESSION, JULY 29, 2015
10:55AM
10:56AM
10:56AM
(10:55 a.m.)
THE COURTROOM CLERK:
Your Honor, this Civil Action
10:56AM
13-1559, Judicial Watch, Inc. versus Internal Revenue Service.
10:56AM going ask counsel please come forward and identify
10:56AM
themselves for the record.
10:56AM
10:56AM
MS. COTCA:
Good morning, Judge.
Ramona Cotca for
Judicial Watch.
10:56AM
THE COURT:
Good morning, counsel.
10:56AM
MS. COTCA:
And with colleague, Paul Orfanedes
10:56AM colleague the table.
10:56AM
THE COURT:
10:56AM
MR. KLIMAS:
Good morning.
Good morning everyone.
Good morning, Your Honor.
Jeff Klimas for
10:56AM
the Internal Revenue Service.
10:56AM
Stephanie Sasarak and Carmen Banerjee with the Department
10:56AM
Justice.
10:56AM
THE COURT:
All right.
With counsel table
Good morning everyone.
10:56AM
scheduled status hearing determine whether not there are
10:56AM
problems with directives issued the last time spoke.
10:56AM
there?
10:56AM
MR. KLIMAS:
Are
Your Honor, the last time spoke July
10:56AM
1st, you indicated that the IRS needed increase the frequency
10:57AM
within which was producing documents, and the IRS also agreed
10:57AM submit status reports the event that TIGTA provided new
10:57AM
documents material sheets
07/29/2015 04:08:16
THE COURT:
10:57AM
10:57AM
Was clear that the Court directed that
there production weekly basis?
MR. KLIMAS:
10:57AM
Thats correct, Your Honor.
And you also
10:57AM
invited the IRS, thats unworkable, file motion
10:57AM
reconsider that order.
10:57AM
THE COURT:
Right.
But looking the plaintiffs status
10:57AM
report, doesnt appear that the governments complied with
10:57AM
that, though. there reason for that?
MR. KLIMAS:
10:57AM
Correct, Your Honor.
The IRS has made two
10:57AM
rolling productions but was doing weekly productions,
10:57AM
would have made more than two productions.
THE COURT:
10:57AM
10:57AM why didnt the government produce
weekly basis?
MR. KLIMAS:
10:57AM
Once went back and spoke with the IRS, the
10:57AM
IRS explained that would burdensome and actually slow down
10:57AM
the production schedule weekly productions rather than
10:57AM
monthly productions, immediately
10:57AM
THE COURT: the order was clear, though, what ordered
10:57AM
was clear, correct
10:57AM
MR. KLIMAS:
10:57AM
THE COURT:
10:57AM
MR. KLIMAS:
10:57AM
THE COURT:
10:57AM
have been burdensome?
10:57AM
07/29/2015 04:08:16
MR. KLIMAS:
Correct, Your Honor. weekly productions?
Thats correct.
But the governments position that would
Our position was that you invited the IRS sheets
10:58AM
file motion reconsider would impose burden, and
10:58AM
THE COURT:
10:58AM
MR. KLIMAS:
10:58AM
THE COURT:
10:58AM
MR. KLIMAS:
Did you file motion? did not, Your Honor.
Some reason why you didnt? thought was appropriate wait until
10:58AM
you entered the order.
10:58AM
was going order entered and -THE COURT:
10:58AM
You indicated the hearing that there
Well, wait minute, though.
You just told
10:58AM
that order was clear that issued July ordering weekly
10:58AM
production, right?
10:58AM
MR. KLIMAS:
10:58AM
THE COURT:
10:58AM
Thats correct. need issue another ordering saying the
original order real order?
10:58AM
MR. KLIMAS:
10:58AM
THE COURT:
10:58AM
MR. KLIMAS:
No, Your Honor.
Then why did you need written order? did not need written order. was our
10:58AM
expectation that you were going issue one because you said you
10:58AM
would.
10:58AM not trying stand semantics.
THE COURT:
Well, think you are. mean, youre telling
10:58AM the one hand that the oral order was clear and that the
10:58AM
government knew had obligation produce documents
10:58AM
weekly basis, but then youre also telling that you thought
10:58AM
would followed written order.
10:58AM
Suppose never issued written order?
10:59AM
oral order somehow another unclear? sheets
For what purpose?
Would that have made the
07/29/2015 04:08:16
10:59AM
MR. KLIMAS:
10:59AM
THE COURT:
No, Your Honor. what the reason for not complying with
10:59AM
the Courts order?
10:59AM
Youre telling that you, officer the court, knew this
10:59AM
the order was clear but, nevertheless, was not complied with,
10:59AM
and guess getting what the reason for the noncompliance
10:59AM
was.
MR. KLIMAS:
10:59AM mean, this serious matter, counsel.
Yes, Your Honor.
The IRS anticipated filing
10:59AM motion reconsider and initially had Ms. Cotcas consent
10:59AM
file motion reconsider.
THE COURT:
10:59AM
10:59AM
Right, understand that, but the IRS didnt
file it, why didnt the IRS comply with the Courts order?
MR. KLIMAS:
10:59AM apologize, Your Honor.
Working for the IRS
10:59AM number jurisdictions the past several years, Ive
10:59AM
appeared over different courts, either bankruptcy
10:59AM
district courts and number judges, and there are number
10:59AM
judges who, had filed motion reconsider before order
10:59AM
was entered, feel would have felt that was inappropriate.
10:59AM
Thats apparently -THE COURT:
10:59AM
10:59AM
was inappropriate?
MR. KLIMAS:
10:59AM
10:59AM sorry, the judges would have thought was inappropriate file motion
reconsider before motion was entered.
10:59AM
THE COURT:
11:00AM
MR. KLIMAS:
07/29/2015 04:08:16
Why? cant speak -Page sheets
THE COURT:
11:00AM
Wait minute.
Why would have been
11:00AM
inappropriate you said its clear that the Court had issued
11:00AM
oral order?
11:00AM was clear that there was order outstanding, why would
11:00AM
have been inappropriate for the government file motion
11:00AM
reconsider that clear oral order?
And weve said that Ive said that four times.
MR. KLIMAS:
11:00AM dont get it. clarify, was our understanding that
11:00AM
there was directive from the Court that was going
11:00AM
followed with written order.
11:00AM
THE COURT:
11:00AM
MR. KLIMAS:
11:00AM appears order followed order? appears that the understanding was
misplaced.
THE COURT:
11:00AM you needed two orders have clearly
11:00AM
enforceable order?
11:00AM
enforceable order, you?
11:00AM
MR. KLIMAS:
11:00AM
THE COURT:
You dont need two orders have clearly
No, Your Honor. theres reason for not complying.
11:00AM ridiculous.
11:00AM
that you didnt think the Court had issued oral order, but
11:00AM
thats not what youre saying.
11:00AM
that the Court had clearly ordered rolling production weekly
11:00AM
basis.
11:01AM
IRS contempt for not having complied with clearly
11:01AM
enforceable order?
11:01AM sheets
This absurd.
This thought you were going say
Its clear from the transcript why shouldnt the Court hold the Commissioner the
MR. KLIMAS:
The Internal Revenue Service was trying
07/29/2015 04:08:16
11:01AM
comply with the directive from the Court.
11:01AM
not done so, but that was not intentional.
11:01AM what the IRS was doing was respect the Court and the
11:01AM
statement from the Court that there was going written
11:01AM
order follow.
11:01AM
there was intent violate the court order something
11:01AM
that was unthwart.
11:01AM
Your Honor said from the bench July 1st.
11:01AM
THE COURT:
11:01AM was the intent
Obviously that was misplaced, but was not
The IRS was intending comply with what
MR. KLIMAS:
11:01AM appears that had doing what? filing motion reconsider once the
written order was entered.
THE COURT:
11:01AM
That just doesnt make any sense all.
11:01AM
mean, think about the public listening this.
11:01AM
says its clear that you issued oral order.
11:01AM
that you issued oral order, Judge, produce documents
11:01AM
weekly basis.
11:02AM comply with that order, and werent going file written
11:02AM
motion for reconsideration for that clearly enforceable oral
11:02AM
order until you issued written order.
11:02AM
any sense, unless missing something.
11:02AM
position?
11:02AM
11:02AM
THE COURT:
11:02AM
MR. KLIMAS:
That just doesnt make
That our position.
sense, apologize.
07/29/2015 04:08:16 understand
Nevertheless, was burdensome for the government
MR. KLIMAS:
11:02AM
The government
But thats your doesnt make
That was the reasoning sorry?
That was the reasoning. that reasoning sheets
11:02AM
was misplaced, apologize; was reasoning.
11:02AM
THE COURT:
11:02AM
(Brief pause proceedings.)
11:02AM
THE COURT:
11:02AM
11:02AM
counsel.
Excuse one second.
All right.
Let hear from plaintiffs
Thank you.
MS. COTCA:
Thank you, Your Honor.
Certainly the
11:03AM
plaintiff took the position that there was definitely
11:03AM
oral order from the bench that was made that day July 1st for
11:03AM
rolling production.
11:03AM
11:03AM addition that, had asked the Court would
also include status reports with the rolling orders.
11:03AM
THE COURT:
And said that well.
11:03AM
MS. COTCA:
And you did, you certainly did. fact, you
11:03AM
heard from and then you asked the defendant state their
11:03AM
position.
11:03AM
certainly willing that, and Your Honor ordered and said
11:03AM
that that would also included written order.
11:03AM
theres written order thats just confirm what Our
11:03AM
position that thats just confirm what you said from the
11:03AM
bench July 1st, and
11:03AM
The defendant did not oppose it.
THE COURT:
They said they would
Obviously,
What are you asking this point?
11:03AM intent was get production these documents.
11:03AM get off tangent holding people contempt court.
11:03AM
Ill that, but dont like doing that.
11:03AM
want get the documents where they are supposed be, the sheets dont want want that,
07/29/2015 04:08:16
11:03AM
plaintiffs.
Theyre entitled the documents.
11:03AM
right know what these documents say.
MS. COTCA:
11:03AM
The public has
And thats certainly what wanted do, and
11:03AM
thats why did notice, Your Honor. thought was
11:04AM
prudent and appropriate bring this the Courts attention.
11:04AM want rolling productions with status reports, said
11:04AM
July 1st.
11:04AM
THE COURT:
All right.
And you consented two weeks?
11:04AM
MS. COTCA: said wouldnt oppose two-week
11:04AM
THE COURT: Okay
11:04AM
MS. COTCA: they wouldnt file motion. the
11:04AM
Court willing the standing order for weekly
11:04AM
productions, and thats what theyre obligated do, well
11:04AM
take weekly productions, Your Honor, with status reports.
THE COURT:
11:04AM
Its outstanding court order that and
11:04AM
quite frankly, may never issue minute order.
11:04AM
order.
All right.
Its court
Thats all youre asking do, right?
11:04AM
MS. COTCA: this point, Your Honor, yes.
11:04AM
THE COURT: know may tempting ask for more, but
11:04AM
thats all youre asking do.
MS. COTCA:
11:04AM
11:04AM want
the documents.
THE COURT:
11:04AM
Thats all were asking for now. want the documents with status reports.
All right.
11:04AM
position.
11:04AM
could, could that.
07/29/2015 04:08:16 just want
Counsel, youre difficult not going hold you contempt.
Clearly,
And you think couldnt, ask the sheets
11:04AM
Stevens prosecutors.
11:05AM
holding people contempt.
11:05AM
orders, though, and you just stood before and told that
11:05AM
was clearly enforceable, oral order.
11:05AM
written order.
11:05AM
shouldnt bear the blunt.
11:05AM
issue maybe wont issue written order, its still
11:05AM
court order, that the Internal Revenue Service has weekly
11:05AM
basis and not buying into any biweekly production
11:05AM
weekly basis produce the documents that are the subject the
11:05AM
courts order July 1st and status report.
11:05AM
think said Monday, each and every Monday until further order
11:05AM
the Court.
11:05AM dont want that. dont like expect people comply with court
You didnt need know youre difficult position, but you
But can tell you this, and will
Thats each
Now, not going hold anyone contempt. think
11:05AM
the governments position clearly indefensible.
11:05AM
ridiculous.
11:06AM
noncompliance with the Courts orders.
11:06AM
noncompliance, will haul into court the Commissioner the
11:06AM
Internal Revenue Service show cause why that person should not
11:06AM personally held contempt court.
11:06AM
clearer.
Its absurd.
Its not going tolerate further there further cant make that any there any part what just said unclear?
11:06AM
MR. KLIMAS:
11:06AM
THE COURT:
No, Your Honor.
All right. everyone understands what the
11:06AM
government the government understands what the governments
11:06AM
obligations are, correct? sheets
07/29/2015 04:08:16
11:06AM
MR. KLIMAS:
11:06AM
THE COURT:
Yes, Your Honor. also encourage you read this opinion, 663
11:06AM
Fed 1270.
Its captioned re: Contempt Findings United
11:06AM
States versus Stevens, which the United States Court
11:06AM
Appeals for this circuit confirmed actually affirmed this
11:06AM
Courts decision hold Stevens prosecutors contempt
11:06AM
court.
11:07AM
this.
11:07AM
within legal authority hold you and the others the well
11:07AM the court and the commissioner the Internal Revenue Service
11:07AM contempt.
11:07AM
expect full compliance with the Courts orders, and the
11:07AM
government believes that basis exists for modification
11:07AM
reconsideration court order, then the government should file
11:07AM motion.
11:07AM
saying you want biweekly production.
11:07AM
And the reason going deny because there has not been
11:07AM
compliance with the Courts order July
11:07AM
compliance.
11:07AM
plaintiffs are entitled this information.
11:07AM
right know what this information is.
Read and understand it. have the authority not going today. think would clearly not going it.
But going forward,
Now, can tell you right now, you can file motion going deny that. expect weekly dont think being unreasonable all.
The
The public has
So, have nothing else say other than you have good
11:07AM
11:08AM
day, all right.
11:08AM
enforceable.
11:08AM
walking out court with your colleagues.
07/29/2015 04:08:16
But think about these court orders.
Theyre
Youre very difficult position, but youre
That might not always sheets
11:08AM the case, okay.
11:08AM
MR. KLIMAS:
Understood, Your Honor.
11:08AM
THE COURT:
All right.
11:08AM
MS. COTCA:
Nothing, Your Honor.
11:08AM
THE COURT:
All right.
11:08AM
MR. KLIMAS:
11:08AM
THE COURT:
11:08AM
MR. KLIMAS:
Anything further?
Thank you.
Your Honor, could ask one question?
Sure, absolutely. the Internal Revenue Service does this
11:08AM
weekly production for number weeks show that
11:08AM
complying with the Courts order and finds that that actually
11:08AM
slowing down the production process, would appropriate -THE COURT:
11:08AM
11:08AM sorry? doing so, its slowing down the
production process?
MR. KLIMAS:
11:08AM
Thats correct, Your Honor. can explain.
11:08AM
The problem that there are certain, guess would call them
11:08AM
fixed costs, associated with creating CDs produce Judicial
11:08AM
Watch.
11:08AM
documents produce Judicial Watch using the software and
11:08AM
technology thats available.
11:09AM
versus once month results hours being spent
11:09AM
minimum, assuming everything works perfectly, doing something
11:09AM
that was only taking four five hours previously.
11:09AM
that additional time
11:09AM
11:09AM sheets takes roughly four five hours produce
THE COURT:
Doing that four times month
Wait minute.
So, spending youre doing
monthly basis, would take four five hours, correct?
07/29/2015 04:08:16
11:09AM
MR. KLIMAS:
11:09AM
THE COURT:
Correct. doing weekly basis, takes four
11:09AM five hours per week?
11:09AM
MR. KLIMAS:
11:09AM
Correct.
The time create the CDs does not
decrease with the number documents.
THE COURT:
11:09AM mean, whats the work? somebody
11:09AM
actually labor intensive human beings, are you
11:09AM
talking about pushing buttons what?
11:09AM
MR. KLIMAS:
There are human beings pushing buttons and
11:09AM
doing different things.
11:09AM
technical steps that are involved that process.
11:09AM
using program called Clearwell.
11:09AM
platform. can walk you through some the
The IRS
Its document review
Its also database management platform.
Once IRS attorneys disclosure specialists have reviewed
11:09AM
11:09AM
documents, determined that theyre responsive Judicial Watchs
11:09AM
FOIA requests, and made any appropriate redactions, once the
11:10AM
information has been redacted -THE COURT:
11:10AM
11:10AM
You have use program especially for
Judicial Watch?
MR. KLIMAS:
11:10AM
Its not program thats only being used for
11:10AM
Judicial Watch, its program that was purchased connection
11:10AM
with the congressional investigations, which are the same
11:10AM
documents that are being used release Judicial Watch.
11:10AM
the same review platform thats used with congressional
11:10AM
investigations with the Department Justice.
07/29/2015 04:08:16
Its sheets
11:10AM
11:10AM
THE COURT:
Werent you supposed produce for
eyes only report the IGs the Office.
11:10AM
MR. KLIMAS:
11:10AM
THE COURT:
11:10AM
MR. KLIMAS:
11:10AM
THE COURT:
11:10AM
MR. KLIMAS:
11:10AM
THE COURT:
Yes, Your Honor.
And that was court order also. did deliver that chambers. was delivered chambers? July 2nd, hand delivered it, yes.
Okay.
All right.
So, you know, had clerks
11:10AM
leave and come, may well be.
11:10AM
Thank you for complying with the court order.
11:10AM
MR. KLIMAS:
11:10AM
THE COURT:
11:10AM
MR. KLIMAS:
11:10AM accept that representation.
Thank you.
Yes, Your Honor. appreciate that.
But yes, thats the document review platform
thats being used.
11:10AM
THE COURT:
11:11AM
chambers, right?
11:11AM
MR. KLIMAS:
11:11AM
THE COURT:
11:11AM
MR. KLIMAS:
11:11AM
THE COURT:
11:11AM
11:11AM
Youre certain you had delivered
Yes, Your Honor.
You didnt deliver personally delivered it.
All right. accept that.
representation, officer the court.
MR. KLIMAS: accept that
All right.
Once the IRS attorneys disclosure
11:11AM
specialists mark these documents responsive and make any
11:11AM
appropriate marks for redaction, someone has create
11:11AM
production folder start this new Bates number sequence for the sheets
07/29/2015 04:08:16
11:11AM
documents put into.
The documents are then copied from the
11:11AM
Clearwell program into this folder.
11:11AM
then what the IRS refers locked.
11:11AM
onto these documents can track what they are, and also
11:11AM
locks and redactions, burns redactions into the documents that
11:11AM
you cant see behind them.
11:11AM
can take half hour complete.
The production folder stamps control numbers
That locking process standing alone
11:11AM
Once the production locked
11:11AM
THE COURT:
11:11AM
process?
MR. KLIMAS:
11:11AM
11:12AM
But that computerized, that locking
Theres someone who has manually initiate
the locking process that computerized.
11:12AM
THE COURT:
11:12AM
MR. KLIMAS:
All right.
The production folder then exported onto
11:12AM
Clearwell server, and then zip file created from the
11:12AM
Clearwell server and exported local hard drive.
11:12AM
process locking and exporting and transferring actually has
11:12AM
happen twice because the IRS generating two sets the
11:12AM
documents, one with the redactions burned in; one with the
11:12AM
redactions not burned that can compare them side-by-side
11:12AM look whats being redacted and make sure its appropriate.
11:12AM
After that point, the Clearwell steps are complete.
11:12AM
The IRS then has password protect the files this zip file,
11:12AM
log onto desktop burn the CDs, and create two sets CDs,
11:12AM
the ones with the redactions and the ones with the redactions
07/29/2015 04:08:16
This sheets
11:13AM
marked but not actually burned into the documents.
11:13AM
IRS position where needs able track what
11:13AM
redactions are being made and why, because the IRS may the
11:13AM
conclusion the production have produce Vaughn index,
11:13AM
either for some portion the documents for all them, the
11:13AM
IRS also exports the tagged document numbers and the basis for
11:13AM
withholding the information and any other associated information
11:13AM
thats reported the person who makes the redactions.
11:13AM
put into spreadsheet that the IRS can trace it, and its
11:13AM
understanding, thats not done contemporaneously, the IRS may
11:13AM
lose the ability track what redactions were made and why and
11:13AM
not able use that the future.
11:13AM
Because the
Thats
Now, those steps take roughly four five hours
11:13AM
complete, and thats the same whether were dealing with
11:13AM
hundred documents whether were dealing with thousand
11:13AM
documents, and thats assuming that everything runs smoothly.
11:13AM possible that, for example, there could problem with
11:14AM
Clearwell, which case has shut down and manually
11:14AM
rebooted, process that takes roughly minutes average.
11:14AM
Sometimes loading documents Clearwell can cause problems with
11:14AM
Clearwell and cause shut down, sometimes Clearwell just
11:14AM
doesnt work for other reasons.
11:14AM
out commission for one two days time for which
11:14AM
documents cannot reviewed produced all.
11:14AM
IRS cannot use Clearwell burn for Judicial Watch because sheets told sometimes Clearwell
Sometimes the
07/29/2015 04:08:16
11:14AM
its busy burning for congressional committees for other
11:14AM
FOIA requestors, public and national committees, Cause Action
11:14AM
Institute, Tea Party Patriots, and only has capacity burn
11:14AM
CDs one type time, gets queued up.
11:14AM
that Clearwell down for one two days the course
11:14AM
week, there would time for the IRS recover, and its
11:14AM
also spending hours minimum producing these CDs per
11:15AM
month rather than hours.
11:15AM
producing the same volume documents monthly basis, its
11:15AM
going require more resources than would produce that
11:15AM
same number documents was doing monthly basis.
THE COURT:
11:15AM the concern even the IRS commits why cant you get the resources?
11:15AM
employees are there the IRS?
11:15AM
How many
internally?
MR. KLIMAS:
11:15AM
Cant you get the resources
There are obviously approximately 90,000
11:15AM
employees the Internal Revenue Service.
11:15AM
resources.
11:15AM percent since 2010.
11:15AM
$20 million responding the ongoing congressional
11:15AM
investigations.
11:15AM
number, but understand one point the FOIA backlog had
11:15AM
increased nearly 300 percent because there was great
11:15AM
increase the number FOIA requests that were being received.
11:15AM
So, could put someone this more frequently?
11:15AM
course, and obviously will, because understand that this
07/29/2015 04:08:16
Its question
The IRS has had its budget cut approximately
The IRS has spent approximately
Since fiscal year 2012 dont have current sheets
11:15AM
the order and will comply with it, but its question
11:16AM
whether that the best use the IRSs resources, given the
11:16AM
fact that has limited resources available.
THE COURT:
11:16AM
Okay.
Well, all have limited resources.
11:16AM
Thats the court order for the time being.
11:16AM
very interesting, but thank you.
11:16AM
court order.
Thats
But thats going the
All right.
11:16AM
MR. KLIMAS:
11:16AM
THE COURT:
11:16AM
Thank you.
Thank you, Your Honor.
All right.
Thank you very much.
Anything
further?
11:16AM
MS. COTCA:
No, Your Honor.
11:16AM
THE COURT:
All right.
And also, note that the Judicial
11:16AM
Watch not trying give you any ideas, Judicial Watch did
11:16AM
not ask that anyone held contempt, thats fair, too.
11:16AM
You just want production the documents, and thats all want,
11:16AM
too.
11:16AM
MS. COTCA:
With the status reports.
11:16AM
THE COURT:
With the status reports, too.
11:16AM
11:16AM
Weekly basis,
every Monday.
MR. KLIMAS:
11:16AM
reports well?
11:16AM
THE COURT:
11:16AM
MR. KLIMAS:
11:16AM
THE COURT:
11:16AM
MR. KLIMAS:
And you would like copy those status sheets
Absolutely.
Understood.
All right.
Anything further?
No.
07/29/2015 04:08:16
11:16AM
11:16AM
11:16AM
11:16AM
11:16AM
11:16AM
11:16AM
THE COURT:
right now. not going schedule another hearing
Actually
MR. KLIMAS: have hearing scheduled for October
7th, believe.
THE COURT:
All right.
Thats right.
Thank you.
Thank you for reminding me.
Have nice day.
Thank you.
(Proceedings adjourned 11:16 a.m.) Scott Wallace, RDR-CRR, certify that
the foregoing correct transcript from the record
proceedings the above-entitled matter.
/s/ Scott Wallace
---------------------------Scott Wallace, RDR, CRR
Official Court Reporter
07/29/2015 04:08:16
7/29/15
---------------Date sheets