Skip to content

Get Judicial Watch Updates!


Judicial Watch • JW v. Kerry Oppo 00785

JW v. Kerry Oppo 00785

JW v. Kerry Oppo 00785

Page 1: JW v. Kerry Oppo 00785


Number of Pages:15

Date Created:July 29, 2015

Date Uploaded to the Library:July 30, 2015

Tags:oppo, classi, 00785, McCullough, KERRY, Server, Kendall, Carol, peterson, Friday, Bill Clinton, hillary, complaint, Emails, justice, government, Benghazi, Secretary, Hillary Clinton, defendant, clinton, filed, plaintiff, State Department, document, department

File Scanned for Malware

Donate now to keep these documents public!

See Generated Text   ∨

Autogenerated text from PDF

Case 1:15-cv-00785 JEB Document Filed 07/29/15 Page THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Plaint vil Action No. 15-0785 JEB)
JOHN KERRY his off capacity
US. Secretary State
Plai11tifT.lL1dicial Watch. Inc.. counsel. submits this opposition Defenclant motion consolidate and motion extend date respond the complaint. Defendant seeks
consolidate this case with later-Jiled case captioned Caz.
(No. 06S)(JEB) and 38Aday extension oftime. beyond the
afforded him respond the Complaint thi 5156. Det endant motion did not fully
explain Plain position these matters. aintift states 0lows:
lVIElVIORANDUM POINTS AND Plaintiff, principle. does not oppose consolidu ase was led tirst. ofAct nstitute tiled its complaint nearly six weeks after Plaintiff led its complaint
and lar copied Plaintiffs legal theory. Tht ifconsolidated. (0.-11 should solidated
into this case. Prior the tilin this motion. Plaintiff informed Defendant counsel that Plaintiff
would not oppose coy vlidation and are onalvlc request for ext slon oftime
Sec Exh, (July emai -hange between counsel).
785-JEB Document Filed 07/29/15 Page Plaintiffdoes oppose, however, consolidation ofthese eas excuse delay
Defendants response this case. Defendant seeks 38-day extension oftime, top ofthe (>0
(lays already has utilized, respond the Complaint. If. Defendant contends. that the
complaints are similar that consolidation proper, Defendant should able respond
both iplaints the date that response Plaintiffs complaint due, not when the
response due. days later. l4oreover, any extended delay runs directly contrary Rule llLl states that consolidation intended (maid unnecessary cost del Fed.
-l2(a)(3)(en1ph added]. The lengthy. unnecesszl osed Defendant
ill suited this matter. This ease involves the re; val and ongoing failure recover agency
every day brings startling revelations ofpo nle destrue ion ofthese
ord Defendant continuing failure recover them. See Exh. (Michael Schmidt. (.op1 u.s Clirltrm Email., Lawyer 511 TIMES. July 24. 2015). Even more disturbinv.
many which apparently ain tied Formation. See Exh. (Michael Schm and
Matt Apuzzo. Hillary Imlun Enmils Said .mz/ain C/( Fed Dam, TIMES. July 24,
2015). While Defendant would like days fashion the Complaint. time
the essence taking action recover these records.
WIIEREFORE, Plainti respectfully requests that the Court den endant motion.
luly 29. 2015 Respectfully submitted.
James Peterson (D.
425 Third Street W..
Washington. 0024
(202) 646-5172 Plairitif/
Case 1:15-cv 0785 JEB Document 7~1 Filed 07/29/15 Page
Case 5-cv 00785-JEB Document 7-1 Filed 07/29/15 Page
Jim Peterson
From: Jim Peterson
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 2:46
To: Federlghi, Carol (CIV)
Subject: RE: Kerry, No. 15-0785
Carol You indicated during our phone call that your client wanted extension the date that response the
Cause Action complaint due, sometime apparently September. the defendant needs brief extension time respond Judicial Watchs complaint, beyond the days already has had, such weekortwo, would not
oppose that. Otherwise, see reason delaythis case because another organization copied our legal theory five
weeks later. defendant intends seek consolidation and also lengthy extension time into September, Judicial Watch opposes
both, Peterson
From Federighi. Carol (CIV) mme@
Sent Thursday, July 23, 2015
To: Jim Peterson
Subject: RE: Kerry, No. 15-0735
Jim mentioned over the phone, defendants request for (and need for) extension not tied consolidation,
and would requesting the extension regardless consolidation, due variety factors, including the fact that
Iwas only recently assigned the case and the difficulty getting adequate participation all necessary parties
Aug st. appreciate you would reconsider this request for reasonable extension. any event, can represent that
Judi Watch does not oppose consolidation but does oppose extending the answer date? Thanks, Carol
From Jim Peterson
Sen hursday, July 23, 2015 1.33
To: Federlghl, Carol (CIV)
Subject: Kerry, No. 15-0785
Carol discussed this morning, client not opposed principle your proposed motion consolidateludicial
Watch case with the later-filed Cause Action complaint. if, however, this results delay, your client requesting extension time respond the other complaint, cannot consent the consolidation, our view, the defendant will have had full sixty days prepare response toJudicia Watch complaint. your
clients position that the two complaints are similar that they should consolidated, are aware reason that
the defendant should able respond both complaints the date that response Judicial Watchs complaint
Thus, defendants position that seeks consolidation also extension time, Judicial Watch opposes both.
Regards, Peterson
Case l:15 cv-00785-JEB Document Filed 07/29/15 Page
1/29/2015 C359 1315*CV Ct7 %JIEl$tonE6 Hmemeltauyd ied-O alilr image
lje etu nrk imes http://nytims/1Nmwqe2
POLITICS Copies Clinton Emalls Seer,
Lawyer Says MICHAEL SCHMIDT MARCH 27, 2015
WASHINGTON examination the server that housed the personal
email account that Hillary Rodham Clinton used exclusively when she was
secretary state showed that there are copies any emails she sent
during her time office, her lawyer told congressional committee
After her representatives determined which emails were government-
related and which were private, setting the account was changed
retain only emails sent the previous days, her lawyer, David Kendall,
said. said the setting was altered after she gave the records the
Thus, there are hdr22@clintonemail.eom emails from Secretary
C1inton tenure secretary state the server for any review, even such
review were appropriate legally authorized, Mr. Kendall said letter
the House select committee investigating the 2012 attacks Benghazi,
The committee subpoenaed the server this month, asking Mrs. Clinton hand over third party could determine which emails were
personal and which were government records.
hIlp:IIwww.rryti mesicam/2015/03/28lus/polillcs/nz>copies ol-ualy clintonemails-on server-lawyer-sayshtnil
C359 li15-CV1QQZ; e*olEIi3ionE6t4auti1I =Ir1Ier7: 3vya% krlaege news conference this month, Mrs. Clinton appeared provide two
answers about whether she still had copies her emails. First, she said that
she chose not keep her private personal emails after her lawyers had
examined the account and determined their own which ones were
personal and which were State Department records. But later. she said that
the server, which contained personal communication her and her
husband, former President Bill Clinton, will remain private. The server was
kept their home Chappaqua, N.Y., which protected around the clock the Secret Service.
Mrs. Clinton disclosure Friday only heightened suspicions the
committees chairman, Representative Trey Gowdy, Republican South
Carolina, about how she handled her emails, and likely lead more
tension between her and the committee.
Mr. Gowdy said written statement that appeared that Mrs. Clinton
deleted the emails after Oct. 28, when the State Department rst asked her
turn over emails that were government records.
Not only was the secretary the sole arbiter what was public reco
she also summarily decided delete all emails from her server, ensuring
one could check behind her analysis the public interest, Mr. Gowdy said.
Mrs. Clintons unprecedented email arrangement with herself and her
decision nearly two years after she left office permanently delete all
emails had deprived Americans full record her time ce,
Mr. Gowdy said that Mrs. Clinton would have answer questions from
Congress about her decision. but he. did not say whether that would
hearing private interview. spokesman for Mrs. Clinton said statement, She ready and
willing come and appear herself for hearing open the American
hIIp:lMrww.nyllmes.cum/2015/03/Zalualpolitics/no-copies-nHullan/ clinim-emalis-on-server-lawyer-says.htmI
Case 1215-CV1GKH: olEli3tma614ilN1lIW1h _(t3AIyJ- 951 Wal nlamje
The spokesman, Nick Merrill, added that Mrs. Clinton representatives
have been touch with the committee and the State Department make
clear that she would like her emails made public soon possible.
The ranking Democrat the committee, Elijah Cum rings
Maryland, defended Mrs. Clinton disclosure.
This con rms what all knew that Secretary Clinton already
produced her cial records the State Department, that she did not keep
her personal emails, and that the select committee has already obtained her
emails relating the attacks Benghazi, Mr. Cummings said. the letter, Mr. Kendall offered defense for the process Mrs. Clinton
had used erentiate between personal messages and government
records. said that those procedures were consistent with guidelines from
the National Archives and the State Department, which say that individual
can make the decision about what should preserved federal record.
So, Mr. Kendall contended, the process Mrs. Clinton used was not
arrangement that unprecedented unique, but instead the normal
procedure carried out tens thousands agency officials and employees the ordinary course.
Mrs. Clinton review her emails, however, not occur when she
was secretary state shortly after she left office. Last October, nearly two
years after she left ce, the State Department sent her letter requesting all
government records, like emails, she may have possessed. response. she provided the State Department December with about
30,000 printed emails that she said were government records. She has said
that additional 30,000 emails were personal. appears that Mrs. Clinton still has copies the emails she deemed
Case 1315-CV- 5xJdEBAaJB!a5tH(-fte iie7,t2wyJFiie/A BKJEtQi:tr5miiiiege
public records. Attached Mr. Kendall letter was one sent him the
State Department this week. letter from the under secretary state for
management, Patrick Kennedy, said that the department understood that
she wanted keep copies those documents. Mr. Kennedy said that the
agency had consulted with the National Archives, and that allowing her
access the documents the public interest will promote informed
discussion she responds congressional and other inquiries.
Mrs. Clinton cannot make the emails public without the State
Department approval. Mr. Kennedy said that the State Department
determined that any the documents were classi ed, additional steps will required safeguard and protect the information. Mrs. Clinton has said
she had classified information her emails. version this article appears print March 28. 2015, page A14 the New York edition
with the headline: Emails From Cinton Time State Dept. Are Her Server, Lawyer
2015 The New York Times Company
hItp l/www.nytimss. ouml2D 15I03l2a/uslpotitics/no copies-of-hillary-elinlon-emalt s-an-server-lzmyev says .h1m
785 JEB Document Filed 07/29/15 Page-1of5
Hillary Clinton esi 0yoQQtli$ 3iLEme@mnimwme7i~IewPirea