Filed: Oct. 07, 2014
Latest Update: Oct. 07, 2014
Summary: ORDER TERENCE P. KEMP, Magistrate Judge. On July 24, 2014, in response to the Court's order directing the filing of a return, the United States filed a request for a hearing. In response, Petitioner objected to the holding of a hearing until a return had been filed and the other items of evidence in the United States' possession (the fingerprint examiner's notes and reports, forensic quality photographs or scans of all latent print cards, and the prints of persons to whom they were compared)
Summary: ORDER TERENCE P. KEMP, Magistrate Judge. On July 24, 2014, in response to the Court's order directing the filing of a return, the United States filed a request for a hearing. In response, Petitioner objected to the holding of a hearing until a return had been filed and the other items of evidence in the United States' possession (the fingerprint examiner's notes and reports, forensic quality photographs or scans of all latent print cards, and the prints of persons to whom they were compared) ..
More
ORDER
TERENCE P. KEMP, Magistrate Judge.
On July 24, 2014, in response to the Court's order directing the filing of a return, the United States filed a request for a hearing. In response, Petitioner objected to the holding of a hearing until a return had been filed and the other items of evidence in the United States' possession (the fingerprint examiner's notes and reports, forensic quality photographs or scans of all latent print cards, and the prints of persons to whom they were compared) are produced. The United States did not respond to the motion. Consequently, on September 5, 2014, the Court ordered the United States to file, within twenty-one days, a return, and to produce the requested items. The due date for a response to that order was September 26, 2014. Nothing has been filed.
The Court is extremely troubled by the United States' approach to this case. The United States did not file a timely response to the petition after the Court granted its motion for an attorney-client privilege waiver, leading to the issuance of an order (Doc. 258) pointing out that a response had not been filed, and directing the filing of a response within fourteen days. The United States then filed three motions to continue its response date, but did not file a response by the third date, leading to another order to show cause (Doc. 265). Almost nine months after the motion to vacate was filed, the United States filed a two-page response suggesting that a hearing be held. That prompted Petitioner to file the motion which the Court granted on September 5, 2014. Consequently, this is the third order the Court has issued in this case reminding the United States that it has missed a deadline.
The Court will not issue further such orders. A response to the September 5, 2014, order shall be filed within seven days. If it is not, a Report and Recommendation may issue recommending that Petitioner's motion be granted, and directing the United States to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed for multiple failures to comply with the orders of this Court.
