Skip to content

Get Judicial Watch Updates!

DONATE

Judicial Watch • JW v State Revised Discovery with Proposed Order 01242

JW v State Revised Discovery with Proposed Order 01242

JW v State Revised Discovery with Proposed Order 01242

Page 1: JW v State Revised Discovery with Proposed Order 01242

Category:

Number of Pages:66

Date Created:January 10, 2017

Date Uploaded to the Library:January 18, 2017

Tags:samuelson, revised, 01242, proposed, Discovery, notice, Susan Rice, Sullivan, exhibit, Mills, order, Benghazi, Secretary, defendant, clinton, filed, State Department, White House, plaintiff, request, FBI, document, records, FOIA, department, office


File Scanned for Malware

Donate now to keep these documents public!


See Generated Text   ∨

Autogenerated text from PDF

Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document Filed 01/10/17 Page THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT COLUMBIA
JUDICIAL WATCH, INC.,
Plaintiff,
U.S. DEPARTMENT STATE,
Defendant.
Civil Action No. 14-1242 (RCL)
PLAINTIFF NOTICE REVISED DISCOVERY PROPOSAL
Plaintiff Judicial Watch, Inc., counsel and pursuant the Court December 21, 2016
Order, respectfully submits that discovery should proceed consistent with this revised discovery
proposal. Pursuant the Court Order and LCvR7(m), the parties conferred several
occasions, but were unable reach agreement discovery proposal. Indeed, Defendant
unwilling agree any discovery all this action. Therefore, Plaintiff submits its discovery
proposal separately from Defendant. proposed order also attached.
Plaintiff discovery proposal focuses two main areas that were addressed the
Court March 29, 2016 Order granting Plaintiff motion for discovery, but were not covered
discovery subsequently undertaken Judicial Watch, Inc. U.S. Dep State, Case No. 131363 (EGS) (D. District Columbia) Case No. 13-1363 These areas are: (i) evidence
wrongdoing bad faith with respect State Department response Plaintiff FOIA request
for records related the talking points provided U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice following the
September 11, 2012 Benghazi attack and (ii) potential remedies that may ensure sufficient
search for responsive records undertaken. Potential remedies include order requiring the
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document Filed 01/10/17 Page
State Department identify and recover federal records (e.g., emails sent received
Secretary Clinton during her tenure the State Department regarding official State Department
business) from other custodians sources, including other agencies and third parties, and
requiring the State Department post these records online. Plaintiff proposes the following
written and oral discovery specifically tailored around these two issues:
Document Requests All documents that concern relate the processing any and all searches the
Office the Secretary for emails relating the September 11, 2012 Benghazi attack
and its aftermath, including but not limited to: searches for records for the Accountability Review Board; searches response congressional inquiries (including requests from the
House Committee Oversight and Government Reform dated September 20,
2012, October 2012, October 29, 2012, and November 2012); searches preparation Secretary Clinton testimony before Congress
January 23, 2013; and searches response FOIA requests, including but not limited the FOIA
request submitted Plaintiff this case.
Such documents would include the tasking, tracking and reporting records for such
searches. Forms DS-1748 and any search slips, search tasker, search details,
shall also considered responsive.
Plaintiff FOIA request seeks records related the September 11, 2012 attack the
U.S. Consulate and annex Benghazi, Libya. The Office the Secretary responded multiple
Congressional investigations and least one, internal State Department investigation into the
Under Secretary State for Management Patrick Kennedy suggested this possible remedy during his
September 2016 testimony the U.S. House Representatives Oversight and Government Reform Committee,
albeit only reference records returned Secretary Clinton: anyone thinks that one their [FOIA]
inquiries did not get full response, have posted all that material, all the fifty-two thousand [pages], our
public FOIA website searchable form that can effect retroactively responsive any earlier
inquiries. (available https://www.c-span.org/video/?414934-1/state-department-officials-testify-foia-requests.)
Plaintiff proposed, potential remedy would expand this same practice records recovered from other custodians
and sources.
-2-
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document Filed 01/10/17 Page
attack. Document Request No. seeks records about the State Department document
collection efforts response these investigations. The purpose the document request
determine whether, during the course these efforts, the State Department discovered that
Secretary Clinton and other high level officials within the agency had used unofficial email
accounts conduct official, State Department business, and, so, when made this discovery.
The State Department was ordered produce all non-exempt records responsive Plaintiff
FOIA request November 12, 2014, but did not acknowledge Secretary Clinton exclusive use unofficial email account until forced after the New York Times disclosed the
existence the account early March, 2015. Therefore, the request relevant the State
Department knowledge and awareness when responding Plaintiff FOIA request that
Secretary Clinton emails were not being searched response the request. also relevant the department knowledge and awareness that emails other high level officials unofficial
email accounts also were not being searched response Plaintiff FOIA request. will
assist the Court determining whether the State Department acted wrongfully bad faith.
Moreover, these earlier document collection efforts were not the subject discovery taken
Case No. 13-1363. The request was included Plaintiff initial discovery proposal submitted May 16, 2016. (ECF No. 42-1). All communications that concern relate the processing all searches referenced Document Request No. above, including directions guidance about how and
where conduct the searches, whether and how search Secretary Clinton email,
Cheryl Mills email, Huma Abedin email and Jacob Sullivan email, and issues,
problems, questions concerning the searches and/or search results.
The State Department has identified Secretary Clinton, Cheryl Mills, Huma Abedin and
Jacob Sullivan former officials likely have emailed about the subject matter Plaintiff
FOIA request. Document Request No. relevant for the same reasons Document Request No.
-3-
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document Filed 01/10/17 Page above, relevant. Like Document Request No. this request was included Plaintiff
initial discovery proposal submitted May 16, 2016. (ECF No. 42-1). All records that concern relate the State Department policies, practices,
procedures and/or actions (or lack thereof) secure, inventory, and/or account for all
records, including emails Secretary Clinton, Cheryl Mills, Huma Abedin, Jacob
Sullivan and staff within the Office the Secretary prior their termination
employment with the State Department and afterwards. about December 2014, Secretary Clinton returned over 50,000 pages federal
records she took with her when she left the State Department early 2013. The State
Department plainly was aware Secretary Clinton email practices least early the
summer 2014 and, October 2014, sent the secretary letter requesting she return any
federal records. September 15, 2014, however, the Court ordered Defendant, consistent with
Defendant own recommendation, produce all non-exempt, responsive records November
12, 2014 and provide Vaughn Index allegedly exempt records December 2014.
Defendant did not inform the Court the time that was the process collecting Secretary
Clinton work-related emails, which were potentially responsive Plaintiff request.
During the summer 2015, Cheryl Mills, Huma Abedin and Jacob Sullivan also
returned thousands emails that related their work for the State Department and which were
potentially responsive Plaintiff request. date, Defendant has not searched all records
returned Cheryl Mills, Huma Abedin Jacob Sullivan.
Like Document Requests Nos. and above, the State Department awareness these
document collections during the pendency Plaintiff FOIA request relevant determine
wrongdoing bad faith. with Document Requests Nos. and above, Document Request
No. was included Plaintiff May 16, 2016 discovery proposal. (ECF No. 42-1).
-4-
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document Filed 01/10/17 Page Plaintiff requests copies the attached records with the Exemption redactions
removed, attached hereto Exhibit The attached records were obtained Plaintiff unrelated FOIA lawsuit against the State Department for records concerning the
processing FOIA request submitted CREW (Citizens for Responsibility and
Ethics Washington) December 2012 seeking records concerning Secretary
Clinton email account. Judicial Watch, Inc. U.S. Dep State (RDM) (D. D.C.)
(Case No. 16-574).
The CREW request, made December 2012, specifically sought records sufficient show the number email accounts of, associated with, Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton,
and the extent which those email accounts are identifiable those associated with
Secretary Clinton. The State Department subsequently advised CREW that had records
responsive its request, but that assertion plainly incorrect. See Ex. Doc. Nos. C06104785
and C06104322. Plaintiff later served FOIA request the State Department for records
regarding the agency processing and response the CREW request. The State Department
produced the attached, heavily-redacted records Plaintiff August 29, 2016 and October 28,
2016. The emails appear show inquiries and discussions 2013 regarding Secretary
Clinton email usage and accounts. Plaintiff seeks unredacted copies these records because,
like Document Request Nos. 1-3, they may shed light when the State Department discovered
that Secretary Clinton used unofficial email account conduct official State Department
business, and, accordingly, whether there was wrongdoing bad faith.
The records are emails exchanged State Department officials about the agency
processing and response the CREW request: January 10, 2013 email from Sheryl Water (Director the Office
Information Programs Services) Heather Samuelson (in the White House Liaison Office for
the State Department) Walter asked Samuelson, regarding the CREW request, did you ever get
any intel you have any concerns about that approach? The remainder the text has
-5-
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document Filed 01/10/17 Page
been redacted under Exemption Doc. Nos. C06104795, C06104864 and C06071648.
According report published the State Department Office Inspector General
January 2016, Cheryl Mills also was informed the CREW request the time and asked for
follow-up. See Department State Office Inspector General Rpt. Jan 2016, pg. 15, posted
January 2016 and available https://oig.state.gov/system/files/esp-16-01.pdf (accessed
January 10, 2017). The name the individual with whom Samuelson followed also has been
redacted from the email under Exemption Ex. Doc. No. C06104864. appears that
Samuelson tracked the CREW request for the remainder her employment the State
Department. Id. April 24, 2013, Gene Smilanksy, the Office the Legal Advisor, wrote
Brett Gittleson follow about the [CREW] request for documents pertaining any email
accounts associated with then Secretary Clinton. Doc. No. C06105118. Again, the relevant
text has been redacted under Exemption Id. August 2013 email from Geoffrey Hermesman, branch chief the State
Department Office Information Programs and Services, Walter, Karen Finnegan, John
Hackett, and other State Department officials, Hermensman informed these officials that
database search identified FOIA cases that contain Clinton the subject line and can
further construed requests for correspondence between the Secretary and other individuals
and/or organizations. these, four specifically mention Emails Email accounts. Ex.
Doc. No. C006105353. This discussion appears have continued through August 2014 between
Smilanksy, James Bair (Office the Legal Advisor), and Clarence Finney (Deputy Director for
Executive Secretariat Staff). Again, however, the relevant text has been redacted under
Exemption Ex. Doc. No. C06104375.
-6-
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document Filed 01/10/17 Page
The deliberative process privilege rests policy affording reasonable security
the decision making process within government agency, however, the privilege
qualified one, and not absolute. Texaco P.R., Inc. Dep Consumer Affairs, F.3d
867 (First Cir. 1995), citing First Eastern Corp. Mainwaring, F.3d 465, 468 (D.C. Cir.
1994). Thus, where documents sought may shed light alleged government malfeasance,
the privilege routinely denied. Id., citing Franklin Nat Bank Sec. Litig., 478 Supp.
577, 582 (E.D.N.Y 1979). The redacted portions the records produced response
Plaintiff request about the proceeding the CREW request may shed light government
malfeasance. Accordingly, the Court should order the State Department produce unredacted
copies these same emails discovery this case. Because these emails were not produced
Plaintiff until August 29, 2016 and October 28, 2016, they were not available Plaintiff when
submitted its initial discovery proposal May 16, 2016. Id. ECF No. 12; Ex. Therefore,
Document Request No. was not included Plaintiff initial discovery proposal. such, they
were also not available Plaintiff while was conducting discovery Case No. 13-1363 and
Plaintiff did not have opportunity ask questions about these records.
Depositions 30(b)(6) witness(es) testify about: the searches referenced Document Request Nos. and above; the policies, practices, procedures and/or actions referenced Document
Request No. above; and the processing the FOIA requests referenced the emails attached hereto Exhibit 1and discussed Plaintiff Document Request No. above,
including but not limited the processing the CREW FOIA request, the
other requests discussed therein from 2012 through 2014 and Plaintiff FOIA
request issue this case.
-7-
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document Filed 01/10/17 Page Cheryl Mills testify about: the searches referenced Document Request Nos. and above; the policies, practices, procedures and/or actions referenced Document
Request No. above; the processing the FOIA requests referenced Document Request No.
above; Mills subsequent search her non-state.gov email account(s) for federal
records and the return those records the State Department about
2015. (Defendant has not yet searched the records returned Mills
determine whether any those records are responsive Plaintiff FOIA
request.); identification individuals (whether State Department officials, other
government officials, third-parties) with whom Secretary Clinton and/or
Mills may have communicated email. (As possible remedy, Plaintiff may
seek order requiring the State Department identify and recover federal
records, e.g., emails sent received Secretary Clinton during her tenure
the State Department regarding official State Department business, from other
sources custodians. This line inquiry seeks information relevant
effectuating that possible remedy.); and Mills discussion with Bryan Pagliano 2009 and 2010 about concerns raised
internally the State Department regarding Secretary Clinton email
practices and federal records retention issues regarding those practices.
Regarding subparagraph 2(f), above, when Mills was deposed May 27, 2016 Case
No. 13-1363, she was asked about internal, State Department concerns regarding the secretary
email practices, but testified that she could not recall any such discussions concerns being
raised. about September 23, 2016, the FBI released its notes interviews conducted
during the course its investigation. According the FBI interview notes State
Department technology specialist Bryan Pagliano, who maintained Secretary Clinton unofficial
email server, Pagliano raised the issue with Mills, who responded telling Pagliano that former
Secretary State Colin Powell had used private email well. Ex. (FBI Notes December
22, 2015 Interview Bryan Pagliano 4). Because the FBI 302 interview notes Pagliano
-8-
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document Filed 01/10/17 Page
were not available Plaintiff when deposed Mills, Plaintiff did not have the opportunity ask
her about these notes. Plaintiff also deposed Pagliano Case No. 13-1363, but Pagliano
asserted his 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination response every question. Redeposing Mills this case would not duplicative and would only seek complete the record
and discover facts relevant this case. Plaintiff requested Mills deposition its May 16, 2016
discovery proposal, but has expanded the subject matter the deposition inquiry explained
subsection (f) above and Document Request No. Jacob Sullivan testify about: the searches referenced Document Request Nos. and above; the policies, practices, procedures and/or actions referenced Document
Request No. above; Sullivan use non-state.gov email account(s) conduct official, State
Department, business and the subsequent private search his non-state.gov
email account(s) for federal records and the return those records the State
Department about 2015 (Defendant has not yet searched the records
returned Sullivan determine whether those records are responsive
Plaintiff FOIA request.); and identification individuals (whether State Department officials, other
government officials, third-parties) with whom Secretary Clinton and/or
Sullivan may have communicated email. (As possible remedy, Plaintiff
may seek order requiring the State Department identify and recover
federal records, e.g., emails sent received Secretary Clinton during her
tenure the State Department regarding official State Department business,
from other sources custodians. This line inquiry seeks information
relevant effectuating that possible remedy.)
Jacob Sullivan was Secretary Clinton Deputy Chief Staff and Director Policy
Planning during her tenure. with Mills deposition, Plaintiff requested Sullivan deposition its May 16, 2016 proposal. Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton testify about: the searches referenced Document Request Nos. and above; and
-9-
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document Filed 01/10/17 Page identification individuals (whether State Department officials, other
government officials, third-parties, including but not limited Sidney
Blumenthal) with whom Secretary Clinton may have communicated email.
(As possible remedy, Plaintiff may seek order requiring the State
Department identify and recover federal records, e.g., emails sent
received Secretary Clinton during her tenure the State Department
regarding official State Department business, from other sources
custodians. This line inquiry seeks information relevant effectuating that
possible remedy.)
Secretary Clinton was served with written interrogatories Case No. 13-1363, and she
served responses October 13, 2016. motion compel further responses certain
interrogatories pending. The topics which Plaintiff seeks depose Secretary Clinton
this case are specifically crafted avoid overlap with the questions posed Secretary Clinton
Case No. 13-1363 and are narrowly tailored address the issues wrongdoing and possible
remedies this case. See Landmark Legal Found. Envtl. Prot. Agency, 959 Supp. 175
(D.D.C 2013) (permitting the deposition former agency head determine use private
email account for official government business). Secretary Clinton was included among the
original deponents identified Plaintiff May 16, 2016 discovery proposal, but Plaintiff has
removed the secretary use the clintonemail.com email account for government business topic for questioning, that subject was covered the discovery taken Case No. 13-1363. Heather Samuelson testify about: the searches referenced Document Request Nos. and above; the policies, practices, procedures and/or actions referenced Document
Request No. above; and the processing the FOIA requests referenced Document Request No.
above and subject matters discussed the documents attached hereto part Exhibit
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document Filed 01/10/17 Page
During Secretary Clinton tenure, Heather Samuelson initially worked assistant
State Department White House Liaison Office and was later promoted serve the head
that office. Until her tenure the State Department ended March 2013, Samuelson was
tasked with tracking the FOIA request served CREW for records regarding Secretary
Clinton email accounts. Samuelson currently serves one Secretary Clinton personal
attorneys and, 2014, reviewed Secretary Clinton clintonemail.com email account
identify federal records. The records returned Secretary Clinton December 2014 were
records identified Samuelson. Samuelson involvement the processing the CREW
FOIA request and/or other requests pertaining Secretary Clinton email account was not
known Plaintiff when submitted its discovery proposal May 16, 2016. Samuelson was
therefore not identified among the proposed deponents. Lauren Jiloty testify about: the searches referenced Document Request Nos. and above; the policies, practices, procedures and/or actions referenced Document
Request No. above; the processing the FOIA requests referenced Document Request No.
above and subject matters discussed the documents attached hereto part Exhibit and identification individuals (whether State Department officials, other
government officials, third-parties) with whom Secretary Clinton may have
communicated email. (As possible remedy, Plaintiff may seek order
requiring the State Department identify and recover federal records, e.g.,
emails sent received Secretary Clinton during her tenure the State
Department regarding official State Department business, from other sources custodians. This line inquiry seeks information relevant effectuating
that possible remedy.)
Lauren Jiloty was Special Assistant Secretary Clinton during her tenure and Plaintiff
requested her deposition its original, May 16, 2016 discovery proposal. this capacity, Jiloty
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document Filed 01/10/17 Page
entered Secretary Clinton contacts into the secretary Blackberries, and accordingly, very
likely possess information about the identities individuals with whom Secretary Clinton
communicated email. See Plaintiff Reply support Notice Proposed Order for
Discovery, ECF No. 4-5. Monica Hanley testify about: the searches referenced Document Request Nos. and above; the policies, practices, procedures and/or actions referenced Document
Request No. above; the processing the FOIA requests referenced Document Request No.
above and subject matters discussed the documents attached hereto part Exhibit and identification individuals (whether State Department officials, other
government officials, third-parties) with whom Secretary Clinton may have
communicated email. (As possible remedy, Plaintiff may seek order
requiring the State Department identify and recover federal records, e.g.,
emails sent received Secretary Clinton during her tenure the State
Department regarding official State Department business, from other sources custodians. This line inquiry seeks information relevant effectuating
that possible remedy.)
Monica Hanley worked Confidential Assistant for Secretary Clinton the Office the Secretary. key assistant Secretary Clinton, Hanley likely possess information
about the identities individuals with whom Secretary Clinton communicated email. See
Plaintiff Reply support Notice Proposed Order for Discovery, ECF No. 4-5.
Plaintiff requested her deposition its original discovery proposal. Clarence Finney testify about: the searches referenced Document Request Nos. and above; the policies, practices, procedures and/or actions referenced Document
Request No. above; and
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document Filed 01/10/17 Page the processing the FOIA requests referenced Document Request No.
above and subject matters discussed the documents attached hereto part Exhibit
Clarence Finney currently the Deputy Director the State Department Executive
Secretariat Staff. During Secretary Clinton tenure served principal advisor and records
management expert the Executive Secretary matters relating the overall management and
control all correspondence and records for Secretary Clinton and the various Deputy
Secretaries State and Under Secretaries State. Finney was included among the original
deponents identified Plaintiff May 16, 2016 discovery proposal. Finney also among the
State Department officials the emails discussing the processing the CREW FOIA request
and other requests concerning the former Secretary email account. See Doc. Request above.
The subject the August 2014 emails with Finney was Former Secretary E-mail Account.
Ex. Doc. No. C06104375. Sheryl Walter testify about the processing the FOIA requests referenced
Document Request No. above and the subject matters discussed the documents attached
hereto part Exhibit See Document Request above. Walter was the Director the
Office Information Program and Services for the State Department, and she appears the
documents attached hereto and referenced Document Request No. above. Plaintiff did not
have knowledge Walter involvement the collections the FOIA requests pertaining
Secretary Clinton email account 2014 the CREW FOIA request, and, therefore, Walter
was not listed among the original deponents Plaintiff discovery proposal.
10. Gene Smilansky testify about the processing the FOIA requests referenced
Document Request No. above and the subject matters discussed the documents attached
hereto part Exhibit See Document Request above. Plaintiff did not have knowledge
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document Filed 01/10/17 Page
Smilansky involvement the processing the FOIA requests pertaining Secretary
Clinton email from 2012 through 2014, and, therefore, Plaintiff did not identify him
deponent its May 16, 2016 discovery proposal.
Plaintiff proposed that its discovery conducted pursuant the relevant Federal Rules Civil Procedure. Plaintiff also proposes that its discovery shall conclude within weeks
the Court order authorizing Plaintiff proposed discovery and that Defendant serve its
complete responses Document Request Nos. through above within days the Court
Order. the event conflicts exist for scheduling third-party depositions, Plaintiff will seek leave
from the Court conduct those depositions specific proposed dates outside the approved
discovery period that are mutually available all parties and third-parties.
Dated: January 10, 2017
Respectfully submitted,
JUDICIAL WATCH, INC.
/s/ Ramona Cotca
Ramona Cotca
D.C. Bar No. 501159
JUDICIAL WATCH, INC.
425 Third Street SW, Suite 800
Washington, 20024
Tel. (202) 646-5172
rcotca@judicialwatch.org
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-1 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-2 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-2 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-2 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-2 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-2 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-2 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-2 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-2 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-2 Filed 01/10/17 Page
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-3 Filed 01/10/17 Page THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT COLUMBIA
JUDICIAL WATCH, INC.,
Plaintiff,
U.S. DEPARTMENT STATE,
Defendant.
Civil Action No. 14-1242 (RCL)
[PROPOSED] ORDER FOR DISCOVERY
Pursuant the Court March 29, 2016 and December 21, 2016 Orders, Plaintiff,
Judicial Watch, Inc. Notice Revised Discovery Proposal and the record herein, hereby
ORDERED that Plaintiff shall take the following discovery this case:
Document Requests All documents that concern relate the processing any and all searches the
Office the Secretary for emails relating the September 11, 2012 Benghazi attack
and its aftermath, including but not limited to: searches for records for the Accountability Review Board; searches response congressional inquiries (including requests from the
House Committee Oversight and Government Reform dated September 20,
2012, October 2012, October 29, 2012, and November 2012); searches preparation Secretary Clinton testimony before Congress
January 23, 2013; and searches response FOIA requests, including but not limited the FOIA
request submitted Plaintiff this case.
Such documents would include the tasking, tracking and reporting records for such
searches. Forms DS-1748 and any search slips, search tasker, search details,
shall also considered responsive.
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-3 Filed 01/10/17 Page All communications that concern relate the processing all searches referenced Document Request No. above, including directions guidance about how and
where conduct the searches, whether and how search Secretary Clinton email,
Cheryl Mills email, Huma Abedin email and Jacob Sullivan email, and issues,
problems, questions concerning the searches and/or search results. All records that concern relate the State Department policies, practices,
procedures and/or actions (or lack thereof) secure, inventory, and/or account for all
records, including emails Secretary Clinton, Cheryl Mills, Huma Abedin, Jacob
Sullivan and staff within the Office the Secretary prior their termination
employment with the State Department and afterwards. Copies the documents attached Plaintiff Notice Revised Discovery Proposal Exhibit with Exemption redactions removed.
Depositions 30(b)(6) witness(es) testify about: the searches referenced Document Request Nos. and above; the policies, practices, procedures and/or actions referenced Document
Request No. above; and the processing the FOIA requests referenced the emails attached
Exhibit Plaintiff Notice Revised Discovery Proposal and discussed
Plaintiff Document Request No. above, including but not limited the
processing the CREW FOIA request, the other requests discussed therein
from 2012 through 2014 and Plaintiff FOIA request issue this case. Cheryl Mills testify about: the searches referenced Document Request Nos. and above; the policies, practices, procedures and/or actions referenced Document
Request No. above; the processing the FOIA requests referenced Document Request No.
above; Mills subsequent search her non-state.gov email account(s) for federal
records and the return those records the State Department about
2015. (Defendant has not yet searched the records returned Mills
determine whether any those records are responsive Plaintiff FOIA
request.);
-2-
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-3 Filed 01/10/17 Page identification individuals (whether State Department officials, other
government officials, third-parties) with whom Secretary Clinton and/or
Mills may have communicated email. (As possible remedy, Plaintiff may
seek order requiring the State Department identify and recover federal
records, e.g., emails sent received Secretary Clinton during her tenure
the State Department regarding official State Department business, from other
sources custodians. This line inquiry seeks information relevant
effectuating that possible remedy.); and Mills discussion with Bryan Pagliano 2009 and 2010 about concerns raised
internally the State Department regarding Secretary Clinton email
practices and federal records retention issues regarding those practice. Jacob Sullivan testify about: the searches referenced Document Request Nos. and above; the policies, practices, procedures and/or actions referenced Document
Request No. above; Sullivan use non-state.gov email account(s) conduct official, State
Department, business and the subsequent private search his non-state.gov
email account(s) for federal records and the return those records the State
Department about 2015 (Defendant has not yet searched the records
returned Sullivan determine whether those records are responsive
Plaintiff FOIA request.); and identification individuals (whether State Department officials, other
government officials, third-parties) with whom Secretary Clinton and/or
Sullivan may have communicated email. (As possible remedy, Plaintiff
may seek order requiring the State Department identify and recover
federal records, e.g., emails sent received Secretary Clinton during her
tenure the State Department regarding official State Department business,
from other sources custodians. This line inquiry seeks information
relevant effectuating that possible remedy.) Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton testify about: the searches referenced Document Request Nos. and above; and identification individuals (whether State Department officials, other
government officials, third-parties, including but not limited Sidney
Blumenthal) with whom Secretary Clinton may have communicated email.
(As possible remedy, Plaintiff may seek order requiring the State
Department identify and recover federal records, e.g., emails sent
received Secretary Clinton during her tenure the State Department
-3-
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-3 Filed 01/10/17 Page
regarding official State Department business, from other sources
custodians. This line inquiry seeks information relevant effectuating that
possible remedy.) Heather Samuelson testify about: the searches referenced Document Request Nos. and above; the policies, practices, procedures and/or actions referenced Document
Request No. above; and the processing the FOIA requests referenced Document Request No.
above and subject matters discussed the documents attached Plaintiff
Notice Revised Discovery Proposal part Exhibit Lauren Jiloty testify about: the searches referenced Document Request Nos. and above; the policies, practices, procedures and/or actions referenced Document
Request No. above; the processing the FOIA requests referenced Document Request No.
above and subject matters discussed the documents attached Plaintiff
Notice Revised Discovery Proposal part Exhibit and identification individuals (whether State Department officials, other
government officials, third-parties) with whom Secretary Clinton may have
communicated email. (As possible remedy, Plaintiff may seek order
requiring the State Department identify and recover federal records, e.g.,
emails sent received Secretary Clinton during her tenure the State
Department regarding official State Department business, from other sources custodians. This line inquiry seeks information relevant effectuating
that possible remedy.) Monica Hanley testify about: the searches referenced Document Request Nos. and above; the policies, practices, procedures and/or actions referenced Document
Request No. above; the processing the FOIA requests referenced Document Request No.
above and subject matters discussed the documents attached Plaintiff
Notice Revised Discovery Proposal part Exhibit and identification individuals (whether State Department officials, other
-4-
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-3 Filed 01/10/17 Page
government officials, third-parties) with whom Secretary Clinton may have
communicated email. (As possible remedy, Plaintiff may seek order
requiring the State Department identify and recover federal records, e.g.,
emails sent received Secretary Clinton during her tenure the State
Department regarding official State Department business, from other sources custodians. This line inquiry seeks information relevant effectuating
that possible remedy.) Clarence Finney testify about: the searches referenced Document Request Nos. and above; the policies, practices, procedures and/or actions referenced Document
Request No. above; and the processing the FOIA requests referenced Document Request No.
above and subject matters discussed the documents attached Plaintiff
Notice Revised Discovery Proposal part Exhibit
Sheryl Walter testify about the processing the FOIA requests referenced
Document Request No. above and the subject matters discussed the documents attached
Plaintiff Notice Revised Discovery Proposal part Exhibit See Document Request
above.
10. Gene Smilansky testify about the processing the FOIA requests referenced
Document Request No. above and the subject matters discussed the documents attached
Plaintiff Notice Revised Discovery Proposal part Exhibit See Document Request
above. hereby further ORDERED that:
The parties shall conduct discovery pursuant the relevant Federal Rules Civil
Procedure. Plaintiff shall conclude discovery within weeks this Order and Defendant shall
serve its complete response Plaintiff Document Request Nos. 1-4 above within days
the Court Order. the event conflicts exist for scheduling third-party depositions, Plaintiff
-5-
Case 1:14-cv-01242-RCL Document 50-3 Filed 01/10/17 Page
will seek leave from the Court conduct those depositions specific proposed dates outside
the approved discovery period that are mutually available all parties and third-parties.
Dated:
_____________________________
U.S. District Court Judge
Cc:
All counsel record
-6-