STIPULATION AND ORDER VACATING DATE, CONTINUING CASE, AND EXCLUDING TIME

JOHN A. MENDEZ, District Judge.

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Assistant United States Attorney, Amanda Beck, Counsel for Plaintiff, and attorneys Clemente M. Jiménez, Counsel for Defendant Cesar Erendira Nava; Dustin Johnson, Counsel for Defendant Georgina Lopez Quintero; Michael Jason Lawley, Counsel for Defendant Alfonso Rivera, Jr.; Chris Cosca, Counsel for Defendant Ruth Kellner; Hannah Labaree, Counsel for Defendant Rodney Sharp; and Etan Zaitsu, Counsel for Defendant Gary Roberts, that the status conference in this matter currently scheduled for December 12, 2017, at 9:15 a.m. be vacated, and the matter be continued to this court's criminal calendar on February 13, 2018, at 9:15 a.m. for further status conference.

Discovery in this case consists of approximately one thousand pages of reports; recordings and transcripts of wiretaps from five target lines; and pole camera data spanning twenty-four hours a day for approximately a month. In addition, the government has indicated that additional discovery is forthcoming.

The parties will require additional time to continue review of discovery, conduct necessary investigation, and confer with their respective clients.

Lastly, Counsel for Mr. Erendira Nava will be unavailable due to a scheduling conflict in another federal matter.

IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED that time within which the trial of this case must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 3161 et seq. be excluded from computation of time pursuant to Section 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv), (Local code T-4), and that the ends of justice served in granting the continuance and allowing the defendant further time to prepare outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant to a speedy trial.

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED, that the status conference in the above-entitled matter, scheduled for December 12, 2017, at 9:15 a.m., be vacated and the matter continued for further status conference on February 13, 2018, at 9:15 a.m. The Court finds that time under the Speedy Trial Act shall be excluded through that date in order to afford counsel reasonable time to prepare. Based on the parties' representations, the Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendants to a speedy trial.