AMENDED STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr., Senior District Judge.

The parties to this litigation, the United States of America, represented by Assistant United States Attorney, Michele M. Beckwith, and for the defendants: 1- Kresta N. Daly representing Aleksandr Kuzmenko; 2- Michael L. Chastaine representing Petr Kuzmenko; 3- Steven B. Plesser representing Arsen Muhtarov; and 4- James R. Greiner representing Valeriy Nikitchuk hereby agree and stipulate to the following:

1. By previous order, this matter was set for status conference on Friday, February 26, 2016.

2. By this Stipulation, the defendants collectively now move to continue the status conference until Friday, April 8, 2016 and to exclude time pursuant to the Speedy Trial Act between February 26, 2016 and April 8, 2016 under Local Codes T-2 (complexity due to the amount of discovery, number of defendants and potential legal issues) and T-4 (time for adequate attorney preparation). The government, to date, has produced discovery of more than approximately 15,300 pages in this case.

3. The parties agree and stipulate to the following and request the Court to find the following:

a. The government has produced initial discovery to date which consists of approximately over 15,300 pages.

b. Counsel for all defendants need additional time to continue to review all the discovery with their respective clients, to continue investigation into this case, continue to do research, which includes legal research, in this case, and to otherwise continue to do review and investigation, using due diligence, that this complex case requires.

c. Counsel for all defendants represents that the failure to grant the above requested continuance would deny counsel for each individual defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.

d. Alexander Kuzmenko's attorney, Ms. Daly, had been preparing for Trial to begin in this district on February 8, 2016, (2:12-CR-00315 JAM), which was scheduled to last for at least one month. That case has resolved and Ms. Daly now requires additional time to adequately prepare herself to go forward with Mr. Kuzmenko's case.

e. All defense counsel need additional time to review the over approximately 15,300 pages of discovery with their respective clients, and to do investigation regarding that discovery and leads from their respective clients, with some defendants having investigation in various states outside of the State of California.

f. The government, based on all of the above, does not object to the continuance.

g. Based on the above stated findings, the ends of justice served by continuing the case as requested outweigh the interest of the public and all the defendants in a trial within the original date prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act.

h. For the purpose of computing the time under the Speedy Trial Act, Title 18 U.S.C. section 3161, et seq., within which trial must commence, the time period from February 26, 2016 and April 8, 2016, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to Title 18 U.S.C. section 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii) which corresponds to Local Code T-2 and Title 18 U.S.C. section 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv) corresponding to Local Code T-4, because it results from a continuance granted by the Court at defendants' request on the basis of the Court's finding that both, the case is complex due to the amount of discovery and number of defendants and potential legal issues in the case and that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and all of the defendants in a speedy trial.

4. Nothing in this stipulation and order shall preclude a finding that other provisions of the Speedy Trial Act dictate that additional time periods are excludable from the period within which a trial must commence.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.