Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
Searching dockets in National Telecommunications And Information Administration x
Alert me of new activity
All Case Activity Alerts Include: Answers, Appeals, Complaints, Motions, Orders, Trial Notes
Other Statutory Actions | District Of Columbia
Status Report
Joint STATUS REPORT pursuant to ECF 59 by CRAIG BURKHARDT, HOWARD LUTNICK, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY, NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET, ARIELLE ROTH, DONALD J. TRUMP, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, RUSSELL VOUGHT. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Shi, Winston)
Administrative Procedure Act/Review or Appeal of Agency Decision | District Of Columbia
Order on Motion for Protective Order Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief Order on Motion to Clarify Order on Motion for Reconsideration
MINUTE ORDER: Upon consideration of Plaintiff's pending motions, Dkt. 13, 14, 15, and 16, it is hereby ORDERED that each motion is DENIED. Each motion seeks the same relief: an order sealing all portions of the record that reveal his "personal identifiers due to alleged ongoing risk of physical harm." Dkt. 13 at 1; see also Dkt. 14 at 1 (renewing "motion to seal his personal identifiers"); Dkt. 15 at 1 (seeking clarification on whether the Court "has considered the four documented law-enforcement safety incidents...in connection with any prior ruling or order concerning Plaintiff's request to seal personal identifiers"); Dkt. 16 at 1 (seeking reconsideration of prior order "declining to grant Plaintiff's request to seal his personal identifiers"). For support, he refers to a "factual record" indicating that "he has been subjected to a high-speed vehicular pursuit;" "a threatening nighttime approach to his residence;" "a formal gang-network death authorization;" and "a sustained pattern of emergency calls logged...by the Ventura Police Department." Dkt. 13 at 1. Although Plaintiff asserts that each of these incidents has been "documented" by local law enforcement, id., Plaintiff fails to offer any evidence supporting his contentions, which come after numerous efforts to seal or anonymize this and related litigation in this Court on an array of grounds. See Min. Orders (June 30, 2026, July 15, 2026, July 23, 2026). To establish a basis for sealing portions of the case, moreover, Plaintiff would need to offer more than uncorroborated "reports" that he personally lodged with various law enforcement agencies. If Plaintiff can offer competent evidence that disclosure of his address or contact information in this case poses an actual threat to his safety, he may renew his motion. Plaintiff is cautioned, however, that repetitive filings seeking the same relief without competent evidence will not yield a different result. Signed by Judge Randolph D. Moss on 7/31/26. (lcrdm2)
In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.
TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS
Already a subscriber? Click here to login
Email (NOTE: Free email domains not supported)
First Name
Last Name
Job Title
Phone
PLEASE NOTE: A verification email will be sent to your address before you can access your trial.
Password (at least 8 characters required)
Confirm Password
Law360 UK may contact you in your professional capacity with information about our other products, services and events that we believe may be of interest.You’ll be able to update your communication preferences via the unsubscribe link provided within our communications.We take your privacy seriously. Please see our Privacy Policy.