The Richman case should be finished as of 5 pm today. The government has come to an agreement with Richman that they only have to return/delete copies of original data and not derived material like memos. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

Good take on the Judge Novak and Halligan motions: www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-...

Well, the tone is not going to impress the judge, but I think they are actually right on the law.

Judge Currie should have issued a broader order.

Richman filed a response yesterday on the question of whether DoJ could hold an internal copy rather giving it to EDVA courthouse. Unsurprisingly, he asked that the copy of original materials should be stored at the courthouse and not with the DoJ.

Another clarification motion from the government in the Richman case. Core problem is a lack of precision by the court and I don’t think the government has been clear enough in their responses.

“resulting in a 21% dismissal rate of the D.C. U.S. Attorney's office's criminal complaints over eight weeks, compared to a mere 0.5% dismissal rate over the prior 10 years” www.reuters.com/legal/govern...

Government claims in the Richman case that they cannot delete/return documents because of Comey’s letter with a preservation request. The problem with that claim is there are almost no overlaps with the data to be deleted and the categories of documents to preserve.

Yesterday around 1 pm the judge in the Richman case issued an order for briefings on the materials from the 4 warrants With very aggressive deadlines (10 am the next day for the government). storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

@benjaminwittes.lawfaremedia.org Government needs to respond to motion to disqualify Halligan by January 20 in this case: www.courtlistener.com/docket/70283...

The clerks for Kollar-Kotelly have been sloppy. The order at the end of the memorandum is very different from the actual order. The definition of what must be returned to Richman was very different between the two. Also the order leaves out “or her designee” while the one in the memo includes it.

Richman has 3 strong arguments for 4th amendment violations (not segregating responsive material, not deleting data for 4 years after Arctic Haze closed, new warrantless search of seized data). Government is largely not addressing these head on.

In Richman v US, DoJ’s strongest argument is ongoing investigation into Comey using the emails that Richman wants deleted. This investigation depends on statute of limitations being tolled by voided indictment. Seems like this will become a bigger part of the case.

@annabower.bsky.social Why hasn’t the DoJ/FBI gotten a warrant for Richman’s/Comey’s emails? what would the argument for probable cause look like that doesn’t depend on knowing the content of those emails already?