JUDICIAL WATCH, INC. v. United States Department of Energy

195 F. Supp. 2d 198
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in JUDICIAL WATCH, INC. v. United States Department of Energy. Read the opinion of the Court — 310 F. Supp. 2d 271
District Court, District of Columbia·Decided April 23, 2002·No. CIV.A. 01-0981(PLF)·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PAUL L. FRIEDMAN, District Judge.

The Court has before it plaintiffs expedited request for a status conference and defendants’ opposition. Plaintiff has made this request based on its concerns over the documents withheld by defendants and the extent to which defendants have redacted certain documents. The Court, however, concludes that these concerns should be addressed in the context of the motions for summary judgment that will be filed according to the Court’s prior order of March 5, 2002 and the stipulation on the briefing schedule approved by the Court on March 19, 2002. Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED that plaintiffs expedited request is DENIED.

SO ORDERED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

JUDICIAL WATCH, INC. v. United States Department of Energy, 195 F. Supp. 2d 198 (D.D.C. 2002).

195 F. Supp. 2d 198 (JUDICIAL WATCH, INC. v. United States Department of Energy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.