Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86 Filed 12/07/18 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 3412

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

PATRICK SAGET, SABINA BADIO )

FLORIAL, NAÏSCHA VILME, GERALD )
MICHAUD, BEATRICE BELIARD, )
RACHELLE GUIRAND, JEAN CLAUDE )
MOMPOINT, YOLNICK JEUNE, )
GUERLINE FRANCOIS, LEOMA )
PIERRE, HAÏTI LIBERTÉ, and FAMILY )
ACTION NETWORK MOVEMENT, )
INC., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
Case No. 1:18-cv-01599
)
vs. )
)
DONALD TRUMP, President of the )
United States of America, UNITED )
STATES OF AMERICA, DEPARTMENT )
OF HOMELAND SECURITY, KIRSTJEN )
NIELSEN, Secretary of Homeland )
Security, and ELAINE C. DUKE, Deputy )
Secretary of Homeland Security, )
)
Defendants. )

PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO THE GOVERNMENT’S MOTION

FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER FOR DELIBERATIVE PROCESS PRIVILEGE

December 7, 2018

1
Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86 Filed 12/07/18 Page 2 of 9 PageID #: 3413

Plaintiffs object to any protective order permitting the Government to categorically invoke

the deliberative process privilege over unidentified documents. The Government’s motion seeking

permission to assert the privilege without specifying which documents are supposedly privileged

is plainly contrary to established law and should be denied.

Background

After Plaintiffs served requests for the production of documents, along with other discovery

requests, on November 30, 2018, the Government advised Plaintiffs of its objections to those

requests, and Plaintiffs attempted to negotiate a resolution. In particular, as relevant here, the

Government asserted that some of the documents sought by Plaintiffs are protected by the

deliberative process privilege. In a phone call and in several follow-up emails, Plaintiffs asked the

Government to explain their privilege assertion and to specifically identify the documents over

which they intend to assert the privilege so that Plaintiffs would have an opportunity to challenge

privilege determinations. Ex. A at 7 (“it would be difficult, if not impossible, to litigate a privilege

issue of any kind, especially the deliberative process privilege, without reference to specific

documents”).

Plaintiffs repeatedly asked the Government to produce unprivileged documents along with

a privilege log, or to specifically describe the documents over which it intended to litigate the

deliberative process privilege, explaining that it is difficult to understand “how the parties could

be expected to reach a categorical agreement, in the abstract and without a privilege log, about (or

how the court could be expected to decide) which documents are and are not protected by the

privilege.” Id. at 5, 7. The Government responded first by generally describing the types of

documents that can be protected by the deliberative process privilege – “material that we believe

should be withheld pursuant to the deliberative process privilege…would include

2
Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86 Filed 12/07/18 Page 3 of 9 PageID #: 3414

recommendations, draft documents, proposals, suggestions, internal memoranda, and other

subjective documents” – rather than any specific documents in this case (id. at 6), and proposed

that Plaintiffs agree that any “recommendations, draft documents, proposals, suggestions, internal

memoranda, and other subjective documents” are privileged, again without any reference to

specific documents. Id. at 4.

Plaintiffs suggested that the Government follow standard discovery procedure and produce

unprivileged documents along with a privilege log (id. at 5), but the Government responded that

“we do not think that the typical path is prudent here.” Id. at 3. Plaintiffs again explained that they

cannot agree “to a request that we agree to let the government unilaterally decide what documents

are privileged and which are not based on nothing more than the government’s say-so and without

even giving the plaintiffs an opportunity to challenge privilege designations” and continued to

suggest that the parties attempt to “negotiate a separate solution that would avoid court

involvement.” Id.

Nevertheless, the Government persisted in its circular claim that privileged documents are

protected by privilege. Id. at 4. In an effort to at least determine the scope of the Government’s

claim, Plaintiffs asked the Government how many documents it believed to be privileged. Id. at 3.

The Government declined to answer. Id. at 2 (“I can’t quantify the figure at this time.”). Plaintiffs

reiterated that they are “willing to work with you towards solutions that would alleviate or reduce

the government’s burden and which would facilitate a resolution of this issue quickly” but again

explained that “we cannot accept a solution that flips on their heads the legal presumptions [with

respect to] the privilege without giving us a description of the documents the government intends

to withhold.” Id. at 1. At that point, instead of agreeing to provide a privilege log or otherwise

describe the purportedly privileged documents or proposing some other compromise solution, the

3
Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86 Filed 12/07/18 Page 4 of 9 PageID #: 3415

Government filed a motion for protective order asking to be allowed to categorically and

unilaterally assert the deliberative process privilege over an unspecified set of documents.

Argument

In the ordinary course of discovery, parties are required to describe privileged documents

in sufficient detail that an opposing party can make an assessment of the privilege claim. Federal

Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(5) requires that when a party “withholds information otherwise

discoverable by claiming that the information is privileged” the party must “describe the nature of

the documents…and do so in a manner that, without revealing information itself privileged or

protected, will enable other parties to assess the claim.” The Local Rules for the Eastern District

of New York are even more specific on this point: “Unless otherwise agreed by the parties or

directed by the Court, where a claim of privilege is asserted in objecting to any means of

discovery…the following information shall be provided…(i) the type of document, e.g., letter or

memorandum; (ii) the general subject matter of the document; (iii) the date of the document; and

(iv) the author of the document, the addressees of the document, and any other recipients, and,

where not apparent, the relationship of the author, addressees, and recipients to each other.” L.R.

26.2(a). Instead of complying with these rules, the Government has filed a motion asking for a

sweeping protective order “that the Government may invoke DPP [deliberative process privilege]

in this case, as Plaintiffs have not shown that DPP is categorically unavailable.” Mot. at 2. This

request ignores settled rules governing privilege in discovery, reverses the burden of proof for

privilege claims, and seeks to expand the deliberative process privilege beyond its legal limits.

The deliberative process privilege is a qualified privilege that exists to promote the free

exchange of ideas among government officials. In re Franklin Nat. Bank Securities Litigation, 478

F.Supp. 577, 581-82 (E.D.N.Y. 1979). The privilege protects “expressions of opinion or

4
Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86 Filed 12/07/18 Page 5 of 9 PageID #: 3416

recommendations in intragovernmental documents” but “does not protect purely factual material.”

Id. at 581. This, of course, creates a something of a paradox, as Justice Brennan has articulated:

“so as to enable the government more effectively to implement the will of the people, the people

are kept in ignorance of the workings of their government.” Herbert v. Lando, 441 U.S. 153, 195

(1979).

For this reason, the deliberative process privilege is not absolute. The Government’s

interest in the free exchange of frank talk must be weighed against the public’s interest in knowing

the decision-making process of its government. Thus, “when the public’s interest in effective

government would be furthered by disclosure, the justification for the privilege is attenuated. Thus,

for example, where the documents sought may shed light on alleged government malfeasance, the

privilege is denied.” In re Franklin Nat. Bank Securities Litigation, 478 F. Supp. at 582.

Thus, the determination of whether and to what degree the privilege applies is inherently

fact-bound. And, as a case relied on by the Government points out, the deliberate process privilege

“usually requires examination of the documents [i]n camera” because “usually only after such an

examination can the court determine whether the government’s interest in nondisclosure outweighs

the interests of the litigants and public in disclosure.” In re Franklin Nat. Bank Securities

Litigation, 478 F. Supp. at 583; Coastal States Gas Corp. v. Dep’t. of Energy, 617 F.2d 854, 867

(D.C. Cir. 1980) (“the deliberative process privilege is so dependent upon the individual document

and the role it plays in the administrative process”).

It is at this point in the process when the five-factor test on which the Government relies

comes into play: when the court is balancing the competing interests of the Government and the

public, it should consider (1) the relevance of the evidence, (2) the availability of other evidence,

(3) the seriousness of the issues at stake in the litigation, (4) the government’s role in the litigation,

5
Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86 Filed 12/07/18 Page 6 of 9 PageID #: 3417

and (5) the possibility that government employees in the future will be less frank by virtue of the

disclosure. In re Franklin Nat. Bank Securities Litigation, 478 F. Supp. at 583. None of these

factors can be assessed without specific reference to the documents at issue, which the

Government has refused to provide. Instead, the Government achieves peak tautology with the

argument that “[d]ocuments reflecting internal deliberations” are subject to the deliberative

process privilege. Mot. at 14. Documents reflecting internal deliberations may indeed be

privileged, but because that determination is so heavily fact-dependent, the Government must be

required to specifically describe those documents. It is impossible for Plaintiffs to determine

whether to challenge a claim of privilege – or for the Court to determine whether to allow the

evidence to be withheld as privileged – if they have no information whatsoever about what the

evidence is.

The Government’s reference to New York v. Dep’t of Commerce likewise supports the

necessity of identifying the documents for which the privilege is asserted. In that case, the court

denied Plaintiffs’ discovery motion “to the extent Plaintiffs’ letter motion challenges Defendants’

invocation of the [deliberative process] privilege on the ground that it is categorically unavailable

in these cases” and specifically declined to reach other issues related to the Government’s

invocation of the deliberative process privilege “as they require particularized consideration of

the documents at issue.” Case No. 18 CV 2921, Doc. 241 at 2 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 14, 2018) (emphasis

added) (Ex. B). The same is true here: the Government cannot invoke the deliberative process

privilege without particularized consideration of the documents at issue. The Government must

6
Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86 Filed 12/07/18 Page 7 of 9 PageID #: 3418

specifically identify the documents over which it asserts the privilege so that Plaintiffs may make

any appropriate challenges to the application of the privilege.1

Similarly, in the related case Ramos v. Nielson, the district court ordered in camera review

of documents over which the Government asserted the deliberative process privilege. No. 18 CV

1554, Doc. 53 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 2, 2018) (ordering the parties to specifically identify purportedly

privileged documents for in camera review) (Ex. C).

The cases are consistent and clear: the deliberative process privilege is a qualified privilege

that protects certain documents in certain circumstances; therefore, only particularized

consideration of each document in the context of the litigation will allow the Court to determine –

or Plaintiffs to agree – that those documents are privileged. It is impossible for the Court to

determine, sight unseen, that an unknown quantity of unidentified documents are protected by a

fact-dependent privilege.

The Government mistakenly contends that it should be granted a protective order to invoke

the deliberative process privilege because “Plaintiffs have not made the necessary showing to

overcome the deliberat[ive] process privilege.” Mot. at 15. This reverses the burden of proof. It is

settled law that the Government, not Plaintiffs, must establish that the deliberative process

privilege applies. Coastal States Gas Corp. v. Dep’t. of Energy, 617 F.2d at 868 (“the agency has

the burden of establishing what deliberative process is involved, and the role played by the

documents in issue in the course of that process”). Moreover, in Coastal States, the D.C. Circuit

determined that the deliberative process privilege did not apply to fourteen specific documents

1
Notably, unlike New York v. Dep’t. of Commerce, Plaintiffs in this case make no
categorical claim as to the application of the deliberative process privilege. Only Defendants make
such a claim.
7
Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86 Filed 12/07/18 Page 8 of 9 PageID #: 3419

identified by the Government. Id. The Government bears the burden of identifying both specific

documents over which it asserts the deliberative process privilege and why those documents are

privileged.

Finally, the Government contends that the documents Plaintiffs have already received are

sufficient. Mot. at 15-16. This contention is irrelevant. The fact that some documents have been

produced has no bearing on whether additional documents responsive to Plaintiffs’ requests are

privileged. Moreover, the Government fails to acknowledge that, while Plaintiffs have received

documents that the Government has already produced to other plaintiffs in other related cases,

Plaintiffs have received no documents at all in response to their discovery requests. Nor has the

Government identified documents already produced that are responsive to Plaintiffs’ individual

requests, or indicated that no additional responsive documents exist.

Because the Government has failed completely to show that the deliberative process

privilege applies – a burden it could not possibly carry without identifying specific documents –

the Government’s motion for a sweeping protective order permitting it to withhold documents

without identifying them or allowing Plaintiffs the opportunity to challenge privilege

determinations should be denied.

Dated: December 7, 2018 Respectfully Submitted,

/s/ Sara Norval

Ira J. Kurzban, (NY Bar No. 5347083) Christopher J. Houpt (NY Bar No. 4452462)
Kevin Gregg* MAYER BROWN LLP
KURZBAN, KURZBAN, WEINGER, 1221 Avenue of the Americas
TETZELI & PRATT, P.A. New York, NY 10020
2650 S.W. 27th Avenue, 2nd Floor Phone: (212) 506-2500
Miami, FL 33133 choupt@mayerbrown.com
Phone: (312) 660-1364
ira@kkwtlaw.com Geoffrey M. Pipoly*
Christopher J. Ferro*
8
Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86 Filed 12/07/18 Page 9 of 9 PageID #: 3420

Sejal Zota* Sara Norval*

NATIONAL IMMIGRATION PROJECT OF THE MAYER BROWN LLP
NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD 71 S. Wacker Drive
89 South Street, Suite 603 Chicago, IL 60606
Boston, MA 02111 Phone: (312) 782-0600
Phone: (919) 698-5015 gpipoly@mayerbrown.com
sejal@nipnlg.org

*Admitted Pro Hac Vice Attorneys for Plaintiffs

9
Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86-1 Filed 12/07/18 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 3421

Exhibit A
 Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86-1 Filed 12/07/18 Page 2 of 11 PageID #: 3422

p‰Œ™L@g…††’…™

f’Z p‰Œ™L@g…††’…™
s…Ž”Z w…„Ž…“„™L@d…ƒ…‚…’@PUL@RPQX@QZSU@pm
t•Z Gm’•”ŒŒL@j“…ˆ@HusanyeIG[@n……”šL@m‰’‰@rN[@‰’`‹‹—”Œ—Nƒ[@k…–‰Ž@aN@g’…‡‡[@
s…ŠŒ@z”[@f’”Ž…™L@j‰ŒŒ@mN[@f…’’L@cˆ’‰“”ˆ…’[@kŽ‰‡ˆ”L@cˆ’‰“”ˆ…’@aN[@i’@k•’š‚Ž
cƒZ cˆL@j…“@HusanyeI
s•‚Š…ƒ”Z reZ@s‡…”@M@„‰“ƒ–…’™@’…Œ”…„@”@”ˆ…@wˆ‰”…@h•“…@{mbMameNfidQYWVQSQ}

j…Z@

w…@ƒŽŽ”@‡’……@”@™•’@’“…„@ŒŽ‡•‡…N@i”@…““…Ž”‰ŒŒ™@“ˆ‰†”“@”ˆ…@‚•’„…Ž@”@”ˆ…@Œ‰Ž”‰††“@”@…“”‚Œ‰“ˆ@”ˆ”@„ƒ•…Ž”“@
’…@JŽ”J@’‰–‰Œ…‡…„N@@tˆ”@‰“Ž²”@”ˆ…@Œ—N@s……L@…N‡NL@c“”Œ@s””…“@g“@c’N@–N@d…”N@†@eŽ…’‡™L@VQW@fNR„@XUTL@XVQ@HdNcNc‰’N@
QYXPI@H³{c}ŽƒŒ•“’™@““…’”‰Ž“@†@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@—‰ŒŒ@Ž”@ƒ’’™@”ˆ…@g–…’Ž…Ž”²“@‚•’„…Ž@†@’†@N@N@N@³I[@‰„N@”@XVX@H³i”@‰“@Œ“@
ƒŒ…’@”ˆ”@”ˆ…@‡…Žƒ™@ˆ“@”ˆ…@‚•’„…Ž@†@…“”‚Œ‰“ˆ‰Ž‡@—ˆ”@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@‰“@‰Ž–Œ–…„L@Ž„@”ˆ…@’Œ…@Œ™…„@‚™@”ˆ…@
„ƒ•…Ž”“@‰Ž@‰““•…@‰Ž@”ˆ…@ƒ•’”@†@”ˆ”@’ƒ…““N´@H…ˆ“‰“@„„…„IIN@@

a‡‰ŽL@™•’@’“…„@ŒŽ‡•‡…@†Œ‰“@”ˆ”@‚•’„…Ž@…Ž”‰’…Œ™·•Ž„…’@™•’@’“…„@ŒŽ‡•‡…L@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”@—•Œ„@‡…”@”@
•Ž‰Œ”…’ŒŒ™@„‰ƒ””…@—ˆ‰ƒˆ@„ƒ•…Ž”“@’…@’‰–‰Œ…‡…„L@—‰”ˆ•”@’–‰„‰Ž‡@•“@@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@Œ‡@Œ™‰Ž‡@”ˆ…@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@”@“…ƒ‰†‰ƒ@
„ƒ•…Ž”“N@@iŽ“”…„L@”ˆ…@Œ‰Ž”‰††“@—•Œ„@‚…@’…‘•‰’…„@”@’–…@—ˆ™@”ˆ…‰’@„‰“ƒ–…’™@’…‘•…“”“@„@Ž”@“……‹@’‰–‰Œ…‡…„@
„ƒ•…Ž”“N@@@

a“@i²–…@’……”…„Œ™@“‰„@‰Ž@”ˆ…“…@„‰“ƒ•““‰Ž“L@”ˆ…@Œ‰Ž”‰††“@’…@…Ž”‰”Œ…„@”@“……@ˆ—@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”@‰Ž”…Ž„“@”@Œ™@”ˆ‰“@
’‰–‰Œ…‡…@”@“…ƒ‰†‰ƒ@„ƒ•…Ž”“N@a‡‰ŽL@”ˆ…@Œ—@‰“@ƒŒ…’Z@”ˆ…@Œ‰ƒ‚‰Œ‰”™@†@”ˆ…@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@‰“@
³„……Ž„…Ž”@•Ž@”ˆ…@‰Ž„‰–‰„•Œ@„ƒ•…Ž”@Ž„@”ˆ…@’Œ…@‰”@Œ™“@‰Ž@”ˆ…@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““N´@i„N@”@XVW@H…ˆ“‰“@
„„…„IN@

a‡‰ŽL@”ˆ…@Œ‰Ž”‰††“@’…@—‰ŒŒ‰Ž‡@”@—’‹@—‰”ˆ@™•@”—’„“@“Œ•”‰Ž“@”ˆ”@—•Œ„@ŒŒ…–‰”…@’@’…„•ƒ…@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”²“@
‚•’„…Ž@Ž„@—ˆ‰ƒˆ@—•Œ„@†ƒ‰Œ‰””…@@’…“Œ•”‰Ž@†@”ˆ‰“@‰““•…@‘•‰ƒ‹Œ™N@@iŽ@Ž™@…–…Ž”L@ˆ—…–…’L@—…@ƒŽŽ”@ƒƒ…”@@“Œ•”‰Ž@
”ˆ”@†Œ‰“@Ž@”ˆ…‰’@ˆ…„“@”ˆ…@Œ…‡Œ@’…“•”‰Ž“@—O’O”@”ˆ…@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@—‰”ˆ•”@‡‰–‰Ž‡@•“@@„…“ƒ’‰”‰Ž@†@”ˆ…@„ƒ•…Ž”“@”ˆ…@
‡–…’Ž…Ž”@‰Ž”…Ž„“@”@—‰”ˆˆŒ„N@@

pŒ…“…@Œ…”@…@‹Ž—@‰†@™•²„@Œ‰‹…@”@…Ž‡‡…@‰Ž@†•’”ˆ…’@„‰“ƒ•““‰Ž“@‚•”@ˆ—@”@’…“Œ–…@”ˆ‰“@‰““•…N@@i”@—•Œ„@‚…@@ˆ…Œ†•Œ@
†‰’“”@“”…@†’@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”@”@ƒ…@•@—‰”ˆ@@’•‡ˆ@‰„…@†@”ˆ…@””Œ@Ž•‚…’@†@„ƒ•…Ž”“@HŽ”@‡…“I@Ž”@Œ’…„™@‰Ž@
Œ‰Ž”‰††“@““…““‰Ž@”ˆ”@‰”@”ˆ‰Ž‹“@—•Œ„@‚…@—‰”ˆˆ…Œ„@ˆ…’…N@

tˆŽ‹“@–…’™@•ƒˆ[@—…@—‰”@ˆ…’‰Ž‡@‚ƒ‹@Ž@”ˆ…@“…ƒ‰†‰ƒ@”‰…@Ž„@Œƒ”‰Ž@†@m“N@aŽ„…’“Ž²“@„…“‰”‰ŽN@w…@’…L@†@
ƒ•’“…L@ˆ™@”@ˆ“”@‰”@”@m™…’²“@dc@††‰ƒ…N@

r…‡’„“L@@

g…††’…™@mN@p‰Œ™@
m™…’@b’—Ž@llp@
t…ŒZ@KQMSQRMWPQMWYPR
‡‰Œ™`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ
———N™…’‚’—ŽNƒ@@

f’Z@m’•”ŒŒL@j“…ˆ@HusanyeI@\j“…ˆNm’•”ŒŒ`•“„ŠN‡–^@@
s…Ž”Z@w…„Ž…“„™L@d…ƒ…‚…’@PUL@RPQX@QRZUV@pm@
t•Z@p‰Œ™L@g…††’…™@\gp‰Œ™`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@n……”šL@m‰’‰@rN@\mn……”š`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@

1
 Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86-1 Filed 12/07/18 Page 3 of 11 PageID #: 3423
‰’`‹‹—”Œ—Nƒ[@k…–‰Ž@aN@g’…‡‡@\k‡’…‡‡`‹‹”Œ—Nƒ^[@s…ŠŒ@z”@\“…ŠŒ`Ž‰ŽŒ‡N’‡^[@f’”Ž…™L@j‰ŒŒ@mN@
\jf’”Ž…™`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@f…’’L@cˆ’‰“”ˆ…’@\cf…’’`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@kŽ‰‡ˆ”L@cˆ’‰“”ˆ…’@aN@
\ckŽ‰‡ˆ”`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@i’@k•’š‚Ž@\‰’`‹‹”Œ—Nƒ^@
cƒZ@cˆL@j…“@HusanyeI@\j…“Ncˆ`•“„ŠN‡–^@
s•‚Š…ƒ”Z@reZ@s‡…”@M@„‰“ƒ–…’™@’…Œ”…„@”@”ˆ…@wˆ‰”…@h•“…@

JJexternal@senderJJ

tˆŽ‹“@†’@‡…””‰Ž‡@‚ƒ‹@”@•“N@@w…@—‰ŒŒ@‡…”@‚ƒ‹@”@™•@‚•”@m“N@aŽ„…’“Ž²“@„…“‰”‰Ž@“ˆ’”Œ™N@@@

w•Œ„@”ˆ…@†ŒŒ—‰Ž‡@ŒŽ‡•‡…@H‰Ž@‚Œƒ‹I@‚…@ƒƒ…”‚Œ…@†’@@“”‰•Œ”‰Ž_@cŽ@™•@Œ…”@•“@‹Ž—@“@“Ž@“@““‰‚Œ…L@‚•”@Ž@
Œ”…’@”ˆŽ@RZSP_@@

pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@’…@Ž”@…’‰””…„@”@‚”‰Ž@”ˆ…@„‰“ƒŒ“•’…@†@“…ƒ‰†‰ƒ@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@”…’‰Œ·—ˆ‰ƒˆ@—•Œ„@‰ŽƒŒ•„…@
’…ƒ…Ž„”‰Ž“L@„’†”@„ƒ•…Ž”“L@’“Œ“L@“•‡‡…“”‰Ž“L@‰Ž”…’ŽŒ@…’Ž„L@Ž„@”ˆ…’@“•‚Š…ƒ”‰–…@„ƒ•…Ž”“@
—ˆ‰ƒˆ@’…†Œ…ƒ”@”ˆ…@…’“ŽŒ@‰Ž‰Ž“@†@”ˆ…@—’‰”…’@’@“…‹…’@’”ˆ…’@”ˆŽ@”ˆ…@Œ‰ƒ™@†@”ˆ…@‡…Žƒ™@”ˆ”Z@HI@’…@Ž”@’”@†@
”ˆ…@ƒ…’”‰†‰…„@“•Œ……Ž”Œ@„‰Ž‰“”’”‰–…@’…ƒ’„L@H‚I@’…@Ž”@’”@†@”ˆ…@’„•ƒ”‰Ž“@Œ’…„™@„…@‰Ž@r“L@’@HƒI@’…@
Ž”@’…Œ”…„@”@Ž™@tps@„…”…’‰Ž”‰Ž·•ŽŒ…““@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@ƒŽ@„…Ž“”’”…@”ˆ”@”ˆ…‰’@Ž……„@†’@“•ƒˆ@”…’‰Œ@–…’ƒ…“@
”ˆ…@““…’”‰Ž@†@dpp@‚™@”ˆ…@g–…’Ž…Ž”N@@t@–…’ƒ…@”ˆ‰“@““…’”‰ŽL@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@Ž……„@”@„…Ž“”’”…@”ˆ”@”ˆ…‰’@’…‘•…“”“@
……”@”ˆ…@—…ŒŒM…“”‚Œ‰“ˆ…„@†‰–…M†ƒ”’@‚ŒŽƒ‰Ž‡@”…“”L@—ˆ…’…‚™@ƒ•’”“@³•“”@‚ŒŽƒ…@”ˆ…@…˜”…Ž”@”@—ˆ‰ƒˆ@’„•ƒ”‰Ž@†@
”ˆ…@‰Ž†’”‰Ž@“•‡ˆ”@—•Œ„@ƒˆ‰ŒŒ@”ˆ…@{g–…’Ž…Ž”²“}@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰Ž“@ƒŽƒ…’Ž‰Ž‡@“•ƒˆ@‰’”Ž”@””…’“@N@N@N@‡‰Ž“”@Ž™@
”ˆ…’@†ƒ”’“@†–’‰Ž‡@„‰“ƒŒ“•’…N´@@s……@w‰Ž†‰…Œ„@–N@c‰”™@†@n…—@y’‹L@nN@QUMcvMPURSV@HltsIHkhpIL@RPQX@wl@WQVPQSL@”@JV@
HsNdNnNyN@f…‚N@QL@RPQXI@Hƒ‰””‰Ž“@‰””…„IN@@@tˆ…“…@†‰–…@†ƒ”’“@‰ŽƒŒ•„…Z@³H‰I@”ˆ…@’…Œ…–Žƒ…@†@”ˆ…@…–‰„…Žƒ…@“•‡ˆ”@”@‚…@
’”…ƒ”…„[@H‰‰I@”ˆ…@–‰Œ‚‰Œ‰”™@†@”ˆ…’@…–‰„…Žƒ…[@H‰‰‰I@”ˆ…@“…’‰•“Ž…““@†@”ˆ…@Œ‰”‰‡”‰Ž@Ž„@”ˆ…@‰““•…“@‰Ž–Œ–…„[@H‰–I@”ˆ…@’Œ…@
†@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”@‰Ž@”ˆ…@Œ‰”‰‡”‰Ž[@Ž„@H–I@”ˆ…@““‰‚‰Œ‰”™@†@†•”•’…@”‰‰„‰”™@‚™@‡–…’Ž…Ž”@…Œ™……“@—ˆ@—‰ŒŒ@‚…@
†’ƒ…„@”@’…ƒ‡Ž‰š…@”ˆ”@”ˆ…‰’@“…ƒ’…”“@’…@–‰Œ‚Œ…N´@@i„N@@H‘•”‰Ž‡@iŽ@’…@f’Ž‹Œ‰Ž@n”GŒ@bŽ‹@s…ƒ“N@l‰”‰‡NL@TWX@fN@s•N@UWWL@
UXS@HeNdNnNyN@QYWYI@Hw…‰Ž“”…‰ŽL@jNIIN@

iŽ@”…’“@†@”ˆ…@Ž•‚…’@†@„ƒ•…Ž”“L@i@ƒŽ²”@‘•Ž”‰†™@”ˆ”@†‰‡•’…@”@”ˆ‰“@”‰…L@‚•”@RRLPPPK@‡…“@—…’…@’‰‡‰ŽŒŒ™@„………„@
’”…ƒ”…„@‚™@dpp@‰Ž@r“N@@g‰–…Ž@”ˆ”@”ˆ…@…˜…ƒ”…„@–Œ•…@—•Œ„@‹…@‰”@‰““‰‚Œ…@”@‡@”ˆ’•‡ˆ@@“…ƒ‰†‰ƒ@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@
Œ‡@ƒŽ†…’’Œ@‰Ž@”ˆ…@”‰…@—…@ˆ–…L@—…@—•Œ„@ŒŒ—@†’@@“…ƒ‰†‰ƒ@ƒˆŒŒ…Ž‡…@”@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“²@ƒŒ‰@”ˆ”@”ˆ…™@……”@”ˆ…@“”Ž„’„@
”@–…’ƒ…@dpp@†’@@“…ƒ‰†‰ƒ@‰…ƒ…@†@‰Ž†’”‰ŽN@

tˆŽ‹“L
j…

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••@
j“…ˆ@aN@m’•”ŒŒ
a““‰“”Ž”@uŽ‰”…„@s””…“@a””’Ž…™
cˆ‰…†L@i‰‡’”‰Ž@l‰”‰‡”‰Ž
uŽ‰”…„@s””…“@a””’Ž…™²“@o††‰ƒ…
e“”…’Ž@d‰“”’‰ƒ”@†@n…—@y’‹
RWQMa@c„Ž@pŒš@e“”L@W”ˆ@fŒ’
b’‹Œ™ŽL@n…—@y’‹@QQRPQ
t…Œ…ˆŽ…Z@HWQXI@RUTMVRXX
f˜Z@HWQXI@RUTMWTXY
j“…ˆN’•”ŒŒ`•“„ŠN‡–

2
 Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86-1 Filed 12/07/18 Page 4 of 11 PageID #: 3424

f’Z@p‰Œ™L@g…††’…™@\gp‰Œ™`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^@@
s…Ž”Z@w…„Ž…“„™L@d…ƒ…‚…’@UL@RPQX@QZRY@pm@
t•Z@m’•”ŒŒL@j“…ˆ@HusanyeI@\jm’•”ŒŒ`•“N„ŠN‡–^[@n……”šL@m‰’‰@rN@\mn……”š`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@
‰’`‹‹—”Œ—Nƒ[@k…–‰Ž@aN@g’…‡‡@\k‡’…‡‡`‹‹”Œ—Nƒ^[@s…ŠŒ@z”@\“…ŠŒ`Ž‰ŽŒ‡N’‡^[@f’”Ž…™L@j‰ŒŒ@mN@
\jf’”Ž…™`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@f…’’L@cˆ’‰“”ˆ…’@\cf…’’`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@kŽ‰‡ˆ”L@cˆ’‰“”ˆ…’@aN@
\ckŽ‰‡ˆ”`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@i’@k•’š‚Ž@\‰’`‹‹”Œ—Nƒ^@
cƒZ@cˆL@j…“@HusanyeI@\jcˆ`•“N„ŠN‡–^@
s•‚Š…ƒ”Z@reZ@s‡…”@M@„‰“ƒ–…’™@’…Œ”…„@”@”ˆ…@wˆ‰”…@h•“…@

j…Z

f‰’“”L@i@—Ž”…„@”@Œ…”@™•@‹Ž—@”ˆ”@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@ƒŽ@ƒŽ†‰’@”ˆ”@”ˆ…™@’…@–‰Œ‚Œ…@”@„…“…@k”ˆ’™Ž@aŽ„…’“Ž@Ž@
d…ƒ…‚…’@QRN@@p’…“•‚Œ™L@“ˆ…@—‰ŒŒ@‚…@–‰Œ‚Œ…@”@YZSP@am@”@m™…’@b’—Ž²“@dc@††‰ƒ…L@…’@”ˆ…@„…@Ž”‰ƒ…_@@cŽ@™•@
Œ…“…@ƒŽ†‰’@“…ƒ‰†‰ƒ@”‰…@Ž„@Œƒ”‰Ž_@@

s…ƒŽ„L@”ˆ…@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@ƒŽŽ”@“”‰•Œ”…@”@”ˆ…@‚…Œ—@ŒŽ‡•‡…@™•@“…”@†’”ˆN@a“@i@“‰„@‰Ž@™@…‰Œ@Œ“”@Ž‰‡ˆ”L@‰”@‰“@
‰““‰‚Œ…@”@’…ƒˆ@@ƒŽƒŒ•“‰Ž@“@”@—ˆ‰ƒˆ@„ƒ•…Ž”“@’…@‰Ž„……„@’‰–‰Œ…‡…„@Ž„@—ˆ‰ƒˆ@’…@Ž”@‚“…Ž”@’…†…’…Žƒ…@”@
“…ƒ‰†‰ƒ@„ƒ•…Ž”“N@@y•’@’…‘•…“”L@‰Ž@•’@–‰…—L@•Ž”“@”@@’…‘•…“”@”ˆ”@—…@‡’……@”@Œ…”@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”@•Ž‰Œ”…’ŒŒ™@
„…ƒ‰„…@—ˆ”@„ƒ•…Ž”“@’…@’‰–‰Œ…‡…„@Ž„@—ˆ‰ƒˆ@’…@Ž”@‚“…„@Ž@Ž”ˆ‰Ž‡@’…@”ˆŽ@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”²“@“™M“@Ž„@
—‰”ˆ•”@…–…Ž@‡‰–‰Ž‡@”ˆ…@Œ‰Ž”‰††“@Ž@’”•Ž‰”™@”@ƒˆŒŒ…Ž‡…@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@„…“‰‡Ž”‰Ž“@N@

tˆ”@“‰„L@i@”‹…@™•’@‰Ž”@‚•”@”ˆ…@‚•’„…Ž“@‰“…„@‚™@”ˆ…@”‰…†’…@ˆ…’…N@@p…’ˆ“@”ˆ…@’”‰…“@ƒŽ@Ž…‡”‰”…@@
“…’”…@“Œ•”‰Ž@”ˆ”@—•Œ„@–‰„@ƒ•’”@‰Ž–Œ–……Ž”N@@

h—@Ž™@„ƒ•…Ž”“@’…L@‰Ž@™•’@–‰…—L@’…“Ž“‰–…@”@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“²@„‰“ƒ–…’™@’…‘•…“”“@‚•”@’…@’”…ƒ”…„@†’@„‰“ƒŒ“•’…@‚™@
”ˆ…@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@’‰–‰Œ…‡…_@@

g…††’…™@mN@p‰Œ™@
m™…’@b’—Ž@llp
t…ŒZ@KQMSQRMWPQMWYPR
‡‰Œ™`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ
———N™…’‚’—ŽNƒ@@

f’Z@m’•”ŒŒL@j“…ˆ@HusanyeI@\j“…ˆNm’•”ŒŒ`•“„ŠN‡–^@@
s…Ž”Z@w…„Ž…“„™L@d…ƒ…‚…’@PUL@RPQX@XZSU@am@
t•Z@p‰Œ™L@g…††’…™@\gp‰Œ™`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@n……”šL@m‰’‰@rN@\mn……”š`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@
‰’`‹‹—”Œ—Nƒ[@k…–‰Ž@aN@g’…‡‡@\k‡’…‡‡`‹‹”Œ—Nƒ^[@s…ŠŒ@z”@\“…ŠŒ`Ž‰ŽŒ‡N’‡^[@f’”Ž…™L@j‰ŒŒ@mN@
\jf’”Ž…™`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@f…’’L@cˆ’‰“”ˆ…’@\cf…’’`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@kŽ‰‡ˆ”L@cˆ’‰“”ˆ…’@aN@
\ckŽ‰‡ˆ”`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@i’@k•’š‚Ž@\‰’`‹‹”Œ—Nƒ^@
cƒZ@cˆL@j…“@HusanyeI@\j…“Ncˆ`•“„ŠN‡–^@
s•‚Š…ƒ”Z@reZ@s‡…”@M@„‰“ƒ–…’™@’…Œ”…„@”@”ˆ…@wˆ‰”…@h•“…@

JJexternal@senderJJ

tˆŽ‹“L@g…††L@†’@”ˆ…@…‰ŒN@@g‰–…Ž@”ˆ…@•Ž‰‘•…@“”•’…@‰Ž@”ˆ‰“@ƒ“…·—ˆ…’…@•’@’…“Ž“…“@”@„‰“ƒ–…’™@’…‘•…“”“@’…@„•…@
‚…”—……Ž@WMQP@‚•“‰Ž…““@„™“@†”…’@“‰„@’…‘•…“”“@—…’…@“…’–…„@H’”ˆ…’@”ˆŽ@SP@„™“IL@Ž„@—ˆ…’…@@”’‰Œ@‰“@“…”@”@”‹…@Œƒ…@
‰Ž@@Ž”ˆ·—…@„@Ž”@”ˆ‰Ž‹@”ˆ”@”ˆ…@”™‰ƒŒ@”ˆ@‰“@’•„…Ž”@ˆ…’…N@@i”@—‰ŒŒ@‚…@‰““‰‚Œ…@†’@”ˆ…@g–…’Ž…Ž”@”@
„…‘•”…Œ™@’…”’‰…–…@ŒŒ@†@”ˆ…@„ƒ•…Ž”“@Ž„@‰Ž†’”‰Ž@“•‡ˆ”@‚™@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“L@’…–‰…—@†’@’‰–‰Œ…‡…L@ƒ’…”…@@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@Œ‡L@
’„•ƒ…@”ˆ…@ŽŽM’‰–‰Œ…‡…„@„ƒ•…Ž”“L@Ž„@”ˆ…Ž@…Ž‡‡…@‰Ž@”‰Ž@’ƒ”‰ƒ…·ŒŒ@—ˆ‰Œ…@Œ“@ƒŽ„•ƒ”‰Ž‡@Ž„@„…†…Ž„‰Ž‡@
„…“‰”‰ŽL@’…’‰Ž‡@†’@”’‰ŒL@Ž„@…Ž‡‡‰Ž‡@‰Ž@”‰Ž@’ƒ”‰ƒ…@Ž@”ˆ…’@‰““•…“·–…’@@“Ž@†@@†…—@„™“N@@@
3
 Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86-1 Filed 12/07/18 Page 5 of 11 PageID #: 3425

iŽ@Ž@…††’”@”@–‰„@—“”‰Ž‡@”‰…·’”‰ƒ•Œ’Œ™@“‰Žƒ…@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@ˆ–…@Œ’…„™@‚”‰Ž…„@RRLPPPK@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@„ƒ•…Ž”“@‰Ž@
”ˆ‰“@ƒ“…·—…@’“…@”ˆ”@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@“”‰•Œ”…@”@”ˆ…@‚…Œ—N@@w…@—•Œ„@“”‰ŒŒ@’…“…’–…@•’@’‰‡ˆ”@”@“……‹@‚Š…ƒ”‰Ž“@Ž@
”ˆ…’@‡’•Ž„“@H“@—•Œ„@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“IL@‚•”@”ˆ…@‚…Œ—@‰“@@†‰’@ƒ’‰“…@”ˆ”@—•Œ„@–‰„@•ŽŽ…ƒ…““’™@Œ‰”‰‡”‰ŽZ@@

™ tˆ…@’”‰…“@‡’……@”ˆ”@”ˆ…@†ŒŒ—‰Ž‡@”…’‰Œ“@’…@“•‚Š…ƒ”@”@”ˆ…@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@Ž„@Ž”@“•‚Š…ƒ”@
”@„‰“ƒŒ“•’…Z@
’…ƒ…Ž„”‰Ž“L@„’†”@„ƒ•…Ž”“L@’“Œ“L@“•‡‡…“”‰Ž“L@‰Ž”…’ŽŒ@…’Ž„L@Ž„@”ˆ…’@“•‚Š…ƒ”‰–…@
„ƒ•…Ž”“@—ˆ‰ƒˆ@’…†Œ…ƒ”@”ˆ…@…’“ŽŒ@‰Ž‰Ž“@†@”ˆ…@—’‰”…’@’@“…‹…’@’”ˆ…’@”ˆŽ@”ˆ…@Œ‰ƒ™@†@”ˆ…@‡…Žƒ™@
”ˆ”Z@HI@’…@Ž”@’”@†@”ˆ…@ƒ…’”‰†‰…„@“•Œ……Ž”Œ@„‰Ž‰“”’”‰–…@’…ƒ’„L@H‚I@—…’…@Ž”@’”@†@”ˆ…@’„•ƒ”‰Ž“@
Œ’…„™@„…@‰Ž@r“L@’@HƒI@’…@Ž”@’…Œ”…„@”@Ž™@tps@„…”…’‰Ž”‰ŽN@@@

tˆŽ‹“L@
j…@
_______________________________
Joseph A. Marutollo
Assistant United States Attorney
Chief, Immigration Litigation
United States Attorney’s Office
Eastern District of New York
271-A Cadman Plaza East, 7th Floor
Brooklyn, New York 11201
Telephone: (718) 254-6288
Fax: (718) 254-7489
Joseph.marutollo@usdoj.gov

f’Z@p‰Œ™L@g…††’…™@\gp‰Œ™`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^@@
s…Ž”Z@t•…“„™L@d…ƒ…‚…’@TL@RPQX@QPZSW@pm@
t•Z@m’•”ŒŒL@j“…ˆ@HusanyeI@\jm’•”ŒŒ`•“N„ŠN‡–^[@n……”šL@m‰’‰@rN@\mn……”š`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@
‰’`‹‹—”Œ—Nƒ[@k…–‰Ž@aN@g’…‡‡@\k‡’…‡‡`‹‹”Œ—Nƒ^[@s…ŠŒ@z”@\“…ŠŒ`Ž‰ŽŒ‡N’‡^[@f’”Ž…™L@j‰ŒŒ@mN@
\jf’”Ž…™`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@f…’’L@cˆ’‰“”ˆ…’@\cf…’’`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@kŽ‰‡ˆ”L@cˆ’‰“”ˆ…’@aN@
\ckŽ‰‡ˆ”`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@i’@k•’š‚Ž@\‰’`‹‹”Œ—Nƒ^@
cƒZ@cˆL@j…“@HusanyeI@\jcˆ`•“N„ŠN‡–^@
s•‚Š…ƒ”Z@reZ@s‡…”@M@„‰“ƒ–…’™@’…Œ”…„@”@”ˆ…@wˆ‰”…@h•“…@

j…Z

tˆŽ‹“@†’@ƒŒ’‰†™‰Ž‡@”ˆ”@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”@—Ž²”@‚Š…ƒ”@Ž@”ˆ…@‚“‰“@†@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@”@’…–‰•“Œ™M
’„•ƒ…„@r“@Ž„@c…Ž”’@„ƒ“[@i@•Ž„…’“”Ž„@”ˆ”@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”@’…“…’–…“@”ˆ…@’‰‡ˆ”@”@‚Š…ƒ”@Ž@”ˆ…’@‡’•Ž„“N@

w‰”ˆ@’…‡’„@”@ˆ—@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”@‰Ž”…Ž„“@”@’ƒ……„@—‰”ˆ@”ˆ…@““…’”‰Ž@†@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@†’@
„ƒ•…Ž”“@”ˆ”@—•Œ„@‚…@’…“Ž“‰–…@”@”ˆ…@s‡…”@„‰“ƒ–…’™@’…‘•…“”“@”ˆ”@ˆ–…Ž²”@‚……Ž@’…–‰•“Œ™@’„•ƒ…„@‰Ž@r“
’@c…Ž”’Z

i@•Ž„…’“”Ž„@†’@™•’@…‰Œ@‚…Œ—@ˆ—@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”@„…†‰Ž…“@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@‰Ž@‚’„@“”’‹…“N@@wˆ”@
—…@’…@•ŽƒŒ…’@‚•”@‰“@—ˆ…”ˆ…’@HŽ„@ˆ—I@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”@‰Ž”…Ž„“@”@“……‹@ƒ•’”@’…“Œ•”‰Ž@†@”ˆ‰“@‰““•…@‚…†’…@‰”@ˆ“@
’„•ƒ…„@Ž™@„ƒ•…Ž”“O@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@Œ‡@†@—‰”ˆˆ…Œ„@„ƒ•…Ž”“N

4
 Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86-1 Filed 12/07/18 Page 6 of 11 PageID #: 3426
a“@™•@‹Ž—L@’„‰Ž’‰Œ™@”ˆ…@’„•ƒ‰Ž‡@’”™@—•Œ„@’„•ƒ…@ŒŒ@„ƒ•…Ž”“@‰”@„…“@Ž”@‚…Œ‰…–…@’…@’”…ƒ”…„@‚™@’‰–‰Œ…‡…L@
’–‰„‰Ž‡@@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@Œ‡@†’@”ˆ…@’…‰Ž‰Ž‡@„ƒ•…Ž”“N@i†@”ˆ…@’…‘•…“”‰Ž‡@’”™@‚…Œ‰…–…“L@‚“…„@Ž@”ˆ…@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@Œ‡L@”ˆ”@
”ˆ…@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@‰“@Ž”@Œ‰ƒ‚Œ…L@‰”@—•Œ„@ƒˆŒŒ…Ž‡…@”ˆ…@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@„…“‰‡Ž”‰Ž@‰Ž@@”‰Ž@”@ƒ…ŒN@i²@•ŽƒŒ…’@†’@•’@
ƒŽ–…’“”‰Ž@”„™@—ˆ…”ˆ…’@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”@‰Ž”…Ž„“@”@†ŒŒ—@”ˆ‰“@’„‰Ž’™@’ƒ…„•’…N@

i”@‰“@•ŽƒŒ…’@”@…@ˆ—@”ˆ…@’”‰…“@ƒŽ@‡’……@H’@ˆ—@”ˆ…@ƒ•’”@ƒ•Œ„@‚…@…˜…ƒ”…„@”@„…”…’‰Ž…I@—ˆ‰ƒˆ@„ƒ•…Ž”“@’…@’@
’…@Ž”@“•‚Š…ƒ”@”@”ˆ…@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@—‰”ˆ•”@†ŒŒ—‰Ž‡@”ˆ‰“@’ƒ…„•’…N@@

y•’@…‰Œ@‚…Œ—@“…”“@†’”ˆ@ƒ”…‡’‰…“@†@„ƒ•…Ž”“@”ˆ”@™•@’…‘•…“”@”ˆ…@Œ‰Ž”‰††“@‡’……@’…@’”…ƒ”…„@‚™@”ˆ…@
„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@’‰–‰Œ…‡…·Ž„@’…“•‚Œ™@”ˆ…“…@ƒ”…‡’‰…“@—•Œ„@‚…@”ˆ…@“•‚Š…ƒ”@†@@”‰Ž@‰Ž@”ˆ…@…–…Ž”@”ˆ…@
Œ‰Ž”‰††“@„@Ž”@‡’……N@b•”@”ˆ…@„…†‰Ž‰”‰Ž@™•@“…”@†’”ˆ@‚…Œ—@‰“@Œ‰””Œ…@’…@”ˆŽ@@’…‰”…’”‰Ž@†@”ˆ…@‚Œƒ‹@Œ…””…’@„…†‰Ž‰”‰Ž@
†@”ˆ…@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@“@“…”@†’”ˆ@‰Ž@”ˆ…@ƒ“…@Œ—N@s……L@…N‡NL c“”Œ@s””…“@g“@c’N@–N@d…G”@†@eŽ…’‡™L@
VQW@fNR„@XUTL@XVV@HdNcN@c‰’N@QYXPI@HŽ”‰Ž‡@”ˆ”@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@‡…Ž…’ŒŒ™@³ƒ–…’“@’…ƒ…Ž„”‰Ž“L@„’†”@
„ƒ•…Ž”“L@’“Œ“L@“•‡‡…“”‰Ž“L@Ž„@”ˆ…’@“•‚Š…ƒ”‰–…@„ƒ•…Ž”“@—ˆ‰ƒˆ@’…†Œ…ƒ”@”ˆ…@…’“ŽŒ@‰Ž‰Ž“@†@”ˆ…@—’‰”…’@
’”ˆ…’@”ˆŽ@”ˆ…@Œ‰ƒ™@†@”ˆ…@‡…Žƒ™´IN@@b•”@”ˆ…“…@‡…Ž…’Œ@’‰Žƒ‰Œ…“@’…@†@Œ‰””Œ…@ˆ…Œ@‰Ž@”ˆ…@‚“”’ƒ”@³‚…ƒ•“…@
”ˆ…@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@‰“@“@„……Ž„…Ž”@•Ž@”ˆ…@‰Ž„‰–‰„•Œ@„ƒ•…Ž”@Ž„@”ˆ…@’Œ…@‰”@Œ™“@‰Ž@”ˆ…@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@
’ƒ…““N´@i„N@”@XVWN@i”@‰“@’…ƒ‰“…Œ™@†’@”ˆ‰“@’…“Ž@”ˆ”@i@“”’•‡‡Œ…@”@•Ž„…’“”Ž„@ˆ—@”ˆ…@’”‰…“@ƒ•Œ„@‚…@…˜…ƒ”…„@”@
’…ƒˆ@@ƒ”…‡’‰ƒŒ@‡’………Ž”L@‰Ž@”ˆ…@‚“”’ƒ”@Ž„@—‰”ˆ•”@@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@Œ‡L@‚•”@H’@ˆ—@”ˆ…@ƒ•’”@ƒ•Œ„@‚…@…˜…ƒ”…„@”@
„…ƒ‰„…I@—ˆ‰ƒˆ@„ƒ•…Ž”“@’…@Ž„@’…@Ž”@’”…ƒ”…„@‚™@”ˆ…@’‰–‰Œ…‡…N@

d…“@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”@“……‹@†’@”ˆ…@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@”@‡’……@”ˆ”@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”@™@—‰”ˆˆŒ„@„ƒ•…Ž”“@‰”@„…ƒ‰„…“@’…@
’”…ƒ”…„@‚™@”ˆ…@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@—‰”ˆ•”@†ŒŒ—‰Ž‡@”ˆ…@’ƒ…„•’…“@“…”@†’”ˆ@‚–…@H’„•ƒ”‰ŽL@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@
Œ‡L@”‰Ž@’ƒ”‰ƒ…I_@a‡‰ŽL@i@@•ŽƒŒ…’@†’@•’@ƒŽ–…’“”‰Ž“@Ž„@†’@”ˆ…@‚…Œ—@…‰Œ“@‰†@”ˆ”@‰“@—ˆ”@”ˆ…@
‡–…’Ž…Ž”@‰Ž”…Ž„“@”@„@ˆ…’…N@

tˆŽ‹“@‰Ž@„–Žƒ…@†’@ƒŒ’‰†™‰Ž‡N@

g…††’…™@mN@p‰Œ™@
m™…’@b’—Ž@llp
t…ŒZ@KQMSQRMWPQMWYPR
‡‰Œ™`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ
———N™…’‚’—ŽNƒ@@

f’Z@m’•”ŒŒL@j“…ˆ@HusanyeI@\j“…ˆNm’•”ŒŒ`•“„ŠN‡–^@@
s…Ž”Z@t•…“„™L@d…ƒ…‚…’@PTL@RPQX@VZTP@pm@
t•Z@p‰Œ™L@g…††’…™@\gp‰Œ™`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@n……”šL@m‰’‰@rN@\mn……”š`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@
‰’`‹‹—”Œ—Nƒ[@k…–‰Ž@aN@g’…‡‡@\k‡’…‡‡`‹‹”Œ—Nƒ^[@s…ŠŒ@z”@\“…ŠŒ`Ž‰ŽŒ‡N’‡^[@f’”Ž…™L@j‰ŒŒ@mN@
\jf’”Ž…™`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@f…’’L@cˆ’‰“”ˆ…’@\cf…’’`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@kŽ‰‡ˆ”L@cˆ’‰“”ˆ…’@aN@
\ckŽ‰‡ˆ”`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@i’@k•’š‚Ž@\‰’`‹‹”Œ—Nƒ^@
cƒZ@cˆL@j…“@HusanyeI@\j…“Ncˆ`•“„ŠN‡–^@
s•‚Š…ƒ”Z@reZ@s‡…”@M@„‰“ƒ–…’™@’…Œ”…„@”@”ˆ…@wˆ‰”…@h•“…@

JJexternal@senderJJ

g…††L@

tˆŽ‹@™•@‡‰Ž@†’@“…‹‰Ž‡@—‰”ˆ@•“@”ˆ‰“@†”…’ŽŽ@’…‡’„‰Ž‡@•’@’…Œ‰‰Ž’™@ƒŽƒ…’Ž“@Ž„@‚Š…ƒ”‰Ž“@”@”ˆ…@„‰“ƒ–…’™@
„…Ž„“@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@“…’–…„@Ž@n–…‚…’@SPL@RPQXN@@@

5
 Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86-1 Filed 12/07/18 Page 7 of 11 PageID #: 3427
d•’‰Ž‡@•’@„‰“ƒ•““‰Ž@‚•”@„ƒ•…Ž”“@”ˆ…@g–…’Ž…Ž”@ˆ“@Ž„@—‰ŒŒ@‰„…Ž”‰†™@“@’”…ƒ”…„@‚™@”ˆ…@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@
’‰–‰Œ…‡…L@—…@“‹…„@‰†@™•@—•Œ„@‡’……@”ˆ”@”ˆ…@g–…’Ž…Ž”@Ž……„@Ž”@’„•ƒ…@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@”…’‰Œ“@”ˆ”@ˆ–…@Ž”@‚……Ž@
‰ŽƒŒ•„…„@‰Ž@”ˆ…@ƒ…’”‰†‰…„@„‰Ž‰“”’”‰–…@’…ƒ’„@’„•ƒ…„@‰Ž@”ˆ‰“@ƒ”‰ŽL@‰ŽƒŒ•„‰Ž‡@”ˆ…@“•Œ……Ž”Œ@’…ƒ’„N@@iŽ@“……‹‰Ž‡@
†•’”ˆ…’@ƒŒ’‰†‰ƒ”‰ŽL@™•@“‹…„@—ˆ…”ˆ…’@”ˆ…@g–…’Ž…Ž”@—•Œ„@‚Š…ƒ”@”@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@•“‰Ž‡@‰Ž@”ˆ‰“@ƒ”‰Ž@”…’‰Œ@’„•ƒ…„@
‰Ž@r“@—‰”ˆ@b”…“@Ž•‚…’“@‚…’‰Ž‡@”ˆ…@’…†‰˜@³dppN´@@Hs…ƒ‰†‰ƒŒŒ™L@”ˆ“…@„ƒ•…Ž”“@ˆ–…@‚……Ž@’„•ƒ…„@ˆ…’…@“@
dppQMRRVQUL@“•‚Š…ƒ”@”@”ˆ…@’”…ƒ”‰–…@’„…’@’…–‰•“Œ™@‰““•…„@HŽ„L@“@„‰“ƒ•““…„L@”ˆ…@’”‰…“@’…@‰Ž@”ˆ…@’ƒ…““@†@
•„”‰Ž‡@”ˆ‰“@’”…ƒ”‰–…@’„…’IIN@@tˆ…@g–…’Ž…Ž”@—‰ŒŒ@Ž”@““…’”@”ˆ…@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@”@’…–…Ž”@™•’@•“…@
†@”ˆ“…@„ƒ•…Ž”“L@—ˆ‰ƒˆ@’…@b”…“@“”…„@dppQMRRVQU@‰Ž@”ˆ‰“@ƒ”‰ŽN@@w‰”ˆ@”ˆ”@“‰„L@—…@…˜…ƒ”@”ˆ”@ƒ…’”‰Ž@†@
”ˆ…“…@„ƒ•…Ž”“@—‰ŒŒ@‚…@“•‚Š…ƒ”@”@”ˆ…@•„”…„@p’”…ƒ”‰–…@o’„…’@”ˆ”@”ˆ…@’”‰…“@’…@†‰ŽŒ‰š‰Ž‡N@@aŒ“L@—…@’…“…’–…@•’@
’‰‡ˆ”“@•Ž„…’@”ˆ…@f…„…’Œ@r•Œ…“@†@c‰–‰Œ@p’ƒ…„•’…@Ž„O’@”ˆ…@f…„…’Œ@r•Œ…“@†@e–‰„…Žƒ…@”@‚Š…ƒ”@”@™•’@•“…@†@”ˆ“…@
„ƒ•…Ž”“L@‰ŽƒŒ•„‰Ž‡@‚Š…ƒ”‰Ž“@‚“…„@Ž@’…Œ…–Žƒ…@Ž„@ˆ…’“™@‡’•Ž„“N@@@@

iŽ@’…“Ž“…@”@™•’@’…‘•…“”@†’@’…@ƒŒ’‰”™@“@”@”ˆ…@”™…“@†@”…’‰Œ@”ˆ”@—…@‚…Œ‰…–…@“ˆ•Œ„@‚…@—‰”ˆˆ…Œ„@•’“•Ž”@”@
”ˆ…@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@’‰–‰Œ…‡…L@“•ƒˆ@„‰“ƒ–…’™@—•Œ„@‰ŽƒŒ•„…@’…ƒ…Ž„”‰Ž“L@‰Ž”…’ŽŒ@…’Ž„L@„’†”@
„ƒ•…Ž”“L@’“Œ“L@“•‡‡…“”‰Ž“L@Ž„@”ˆ…’@“•‚Š…ƒ”‰–…@„ƒ•…Ž”“@—ˆ‰ƒˆ@’…†Œ…ƒ”@”ˆ…@…’“ŽŒ@‰Ž‰Ž“@†@”ˆ…@—’‰”…’@
’”ˆ…’@”ˆŽ@”ˆ…@Œ‰ƒ™@†@”ˆ…@‡…Žƒ™@”ˆ”Z@HI@’…@Ž”@’”@†@”ˆ…@ƒ…’”‰†‰…„@“•Œ……Ž”Œ@„‰Ž‰“”’”‰–…@’…ƒ’„L@H‚I@—…’…@
Ž”@’”@†@”ˆ…@’„•ƒ”‰Ž“@Œ’…„™@„…@‰Ž@r“L@’@HƒI@’…@Ž”@’…Œ”…„@”@Ž™@tps@„…”…’‰Ž”‰ŽN@@@

b“…„@Ž@”ˆ…@‚–…L@—…@“‹@”ˆ”@™•@‡…”@‚ƒ‹@”@•“@‚™@”’’—@’Ž‰Ž‡@’…‡’„‰Ž‡@™•’@“‰”‰ŽN@@sˆ•Œ„@™•@‡’……L@
—…@—•Œ„@Ž……„@”@…Ž”…’@‰Ž”@@“”‰•Œ”‰Ž@“@“Ž@“@““‰‚Œ…N@@b•”@“@—…@„‰“ƒ•““…„L@‚…ƒ•“…@„‰“ƒ–…’™@‰“@–‰Ž‡@†’—’„@
”@“•ƒˆ@@†“”@ƒ…L@”ˆ…@g–…’Ž…Ž”@—‰ŒŒ@Ž……„@”@“……‹@@’”…ƒ”‰–…@’„…’@’…‡’„‰Ž‡@’…–‰•“Œ™@•Ž’„•ƒ…„L@…˜”’M’…ƒ’„@
”…’‰Œ@”ˆ”@‰“@’”…ƒ”…„@‚™@”ˆ…@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@’‰–‰Œ…‡…N@@@

a„„‰”‰ŽŒŒ™L@—‰”ˆ@’…“…ƒ”@”@@’…Ž…—…„@Œ‰ƒ”‰Ž@†’@@“”™L@—…@Ž”…@”ˆ”L@„•’‰Ž‡@•’@ƒŒŒL@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@„‰„@Ž”@ƒŽ“…Ž”@”@
“•ƒˆ@Ž@Œ‰ƒ”‰ŽN@@

w‰”ˆ@’…“…ƒ”@”@g…††²“@…‰Œ@‚…Œ—@‚•”@”ˆ…@rfa“L@—…@Ž”…@”ˆ”@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“²@„‰††…’…Ž”@’…‘•…“”“@’…“…Ž”@„‰††…’…Ž”@
‰““•…“N@@aŒŒ@†@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“²@’…‘•…“”“@Ž@”ˆ…@wˆ‰”…@h•“…L@ˆ—…–…’L@’…“…Ž”@‚•’„…Ž“…@‰““•…“@•Ž„…’@cˆ…Ž…™N@@v’‰•“@†@
”ˆ…“…@’…‘•…“”“@‰Œ‰ƒ”…@…˜…ƒ•”‰–…@’‰–‰Œ…‡…“@“@—…ŒŒN@@

f‰ŽŒŒ™L@—‰”ˆ@’…“…ƒ”@”@m’N@p’…Œ‡’L@™@•Ž„…’“”Ž„‰Ž‡@‰“@”ˆ”@ˆ…@‰“@Ž”@–‰Œ‚Œ…@Ž…˜”@—……‹L@‚•”@—•Œ„@‚…@–‰Œ‚Œ…@Ž@
d…ƒ…‚…’@QX@H…’@”ˆ…@””ƒˆ…„@…‰ŒIN@@@a„„‰”‰ŽŒŒ™L@“@Ž”…„@‰Ž@”ˆ…@””ƒˆ…„@…‰ŒL@Ž„@‰Ž@Ž@…††’”@”@ˆ…Œ@—‰”ˆ@
“ƒˆ…„•Œ‰Ž‡@Œ‡‰“”‰ƒ“L@Œ…“…@Ž”…@”ˆ”@”ˆ…@”ˆ…’@„…“‰”‰Ž“@Ž”‰ƒ…„@†’@Ž…˜”@—……‹@Hd‰’…ƒ”’@c‰““Ž@Ž@d…ƒ…‚…’@QQL@Ž„@
m’N@h‰Œ”Ž@Ž@d…ƒ…‚…’@QSI@—‰ŒŒ@Ž”@‡@†’—’„@”@”ˆ“…@”‰…“L@Ž„@”ˆ…@“ƒˆ…„•Œ‰Ž‡@†@”ˆ“…@„…“‰”‰Ž“@—‰ŒŒ@‚…@”ˆ…@
“•‚Š…ƒ”@†@†•’”ˆ…’@ƒŽ–…’“”‰Ž“@‚…”—……Ž@”ˆ…@’”‰…“N@@w…@—‰ŒŒ@‡…”@‚ƒ‹@”@™•@‚™@f’‰„™N@@@pŒ…“…@Ž”…@”ˆ”@—…@—‰ŒŒ@Œ‰‹…Œ™@
ˆ–…@–‰Œ‚‰Œ‰”™@†’@”ˆ…@†‰’“”@—……‹@‰Ž@jŽ•’™@“@—…ŒŒN@@@

tˆŽ‹“L@
j…@

_______________________________
Joseph A. Marutollo
Assistant United States Attorney
Chief, Immigration Litigation
United States Attorney’s Office
Eastern District of New York
271-A Cadman Plaza East, 7th Floor
Brooklyn, New York 11201
Telephone: (718) 254-6288
Fax: (718) 254-7489
Joseph.marutollo@usdoj.gov

6
 Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86-1 Filed 12/07/18 Page 8 of 11 PageID #: 3428

f’Z@p‰Œ™L@g…††’…™@\gp‰Œ™`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^@@
s…Ž”Z@t•…“„™L@d…ƒ…‚…’@TL@RPQX@UZTT@pm@
t•Z@m’•”ŒŒL@j“…ˆ@HusanyeI@\jm’•”ŒŒ`•“N„ŠN‡–^[@n……”šL@m‰’‰@rN@\mn……”š`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@
‰’`‹‹—”Œ—Nƒ[@k…–‰Ž@aN@g’…‡‡@\k‡’…‡‡`‹‹”Œ—Nƒ^[@s…ŠŒ@z”@\“…ŠŒ`Ž‰ŽŒ‡N’‡^[@f’”Ž…™L@j‰ŒŒ@mN@
\jf’”Ž…™`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@f…’’L@cˆ’‰“”ˆ…’@\cf…’’`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@kŽ‰‡ˆ”L@cˆ’‰“”ˆ…’@aN@
\ckŽ‰‡ˆ”`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@i’@k•’š‚Ž@\‰’`‹‹”Œ—Nƒ^@
cƒZ@cˆL@j…“@HusanyeI@\jcˆ`•“N„ŠN‡–^@
s•‚Š…ƒ”Z@reZ@s‡…”@M@„‰“ƒ–…’™@’…Œ”…„@”@”ˆ…@wˆ‰”…@h•“…@

j…Z@

h…’…²“@™@“•’™N@iŽ@„„‰”‰Ž@”@”ˆ…@‚…Œ—@‘•…“”‰Ž“@i@’‰“…L@†……Œ@†’……@”@’…Œ™@—‰”ˆ@Ž™”ˆ‰Ž‡@‰ŽƒŽ“‰“”…Ž”@—‰”ˆ@™•’@
•Ž„…’“”Ž„‰Ž‡N@@w…@”ˆŽ‹@™•@†’@ˆ–‰Ž‡@”ˆ‰“@ƒŒŒ@—ˆ…Ž@™•@„‰„·‰”@ŒŒ—…„@•“@”@†Œ…“ˆ@•”@“…@ƒ’‰”‰ƒŒ@‰““•…“@‘•‰ƒ‹Œ™L@
—ˆ‰ƒˆ@—…@‚…Œ‰…–…@‰“@‰Ž@…–…’™Ž…²“@‰Ž”…’…“”N@@

™ HQI@g–…’Ž…Ž”@‰Ž”…Ž„“@”@†‰Œ…@@”‰Ž@”@’…ƒŽ“‰„…’@j•„‡…@k•Ž”š²“@’•Œ‰Ž‡@—O’O”@”ˆ…@’’‰…”™@†@…˜”’M’…ƒ’„@
„‰“ƒ–…’™N
o pŒ‰Ž”‰††“²@’…“Ž“…Z@@a“@i@‰Ž„‰ƒ”…„@Ž@”ˆ…@ƒŒŒL@—…@”ˆ‰Ž‹@“•ƒˆ@@”‰Ž@‰“@•ŽŽ…ƒ…““’™L@“@‰”@—•Œ„@‚…@
…““…Ž”‰ŒŒ™@”ˆ…@”ˆ‰’„@”‰…@j•„‡…@k•Ž”š@—•Œ„@ˆ–…@”@’•Œ…@Ž@”ˆ…@””…’·ˆ…@„‰„@“@Žƒ…@”@”ˆ…@”‰Ž@”@
„‰“‰““@ˆ…’‰Ž‡L@Œ‚…‰”@“…—ˆ”@‘•…Œ™@Hs……@QQNQSNQX@h’‡N@t’N@”@N@XV@QMUI@Ž„@‡‰Ž@‰Ž@’…“Ž“…@”@”ˆ…@
‡–…’Ž…Ž”²“@—’‰””…Ž@”‰ŽN@@iŽ@Œ‰‡ˆ”@†@”ˆ…“…@”—@’‰’@’•Œ‰Ž‡“@†’@j•„‡…@k•Ž”šL@—…@”ˆ‰Ž‹@”ˆ…@’”‰…“²@
ƒŒŒ…ƒ”‰–…@”‰…@‰“@‚…””…’@“…Ž”@Œ‰”‰‡”‰Ž‡@”ˆ…@”ˆ…’@‰““•…“@„‰“ƒ•““…„@‰Ž@”ˆ‰“@…‰ŒN@@h—…–…’L@‚–‰•“Œ™L@‰”@‰“@”ˆ…@
‡–…’Ž…Ž”²“@’…’‡”‰–…@”@†‰Œ…@@”‰Ž@”@’…ƒŽ“‰„…’@Ž„@‰†@‰”@ƒˆ“…“@”@„@“L@Œ‰Ž”‰††“@—‰ŒŒ@ƒŽ“‰„…’@@
’…“Ž“…@ƒƒ’„‰Ž‡Œ™N@@

™ HRI@g–…’Ž…Ž”@”ˆ‰Ž‹“@”ˆ”@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“²@—’‰””…Ž@„‰“ƒ–…’™@‰“@…’@“…@‰’…’@”@”ˆ…@…˜”…Ž”@‰”@“……‹“@„ƒ•…Ž”“@†’@
ƒ•“”„‰Ž“@”@”ˆ…@wˆ‰”…@h•“…@H‰ŽƒŒ•„‰Ž‡@‰Ž„‰–‰„•Œ@ƒ•“”„‰Ž“@Ž„@††‰ƒ…“@“•‚“•…„@‚™@”ˆ…@wˆ‰”…@h•“…L@“•ƒˆ@“@
”ˆ…@e˜…ƒ•”‰–…@o††‰ƒ…@†@”ˆ…@p’…“‰„…Ž”L@o††‰ƒ…@†@iŽ”…’‡–…’Ž…Ž”Œ@a††‰’“L@…”ƒNI[@‡–…’Ž…Ž”@“……‹“@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@
ƒŽ“…Ž”@”@—‰”ˆ„’—@”ˆ“…@„‰“ƒ–…’™@’…‘•…“”“N@g–…’Ž…Ž”²“@’‡•…Ž”L@‰Ž@‚’„@“”’‹…“L@‰“@”ˆ…@‚•’„…Ž@†@“……‹‰Ž‡@
”ˆ“…@„ƒ•…Ž”“@“@—…ŒŒ@“@–’‰•“@’‰–‰Œ…‡…“N@g–…’Ž…Ž”@’‰“…„@”ˆ‰“@‰““•…@‚™@ˆŽ…@”„™@”@‚”‰Ž@ƒŒ’‰”™@Ž@
”ˆ‰“@‰““•…L@Ž„@—‰ŒŒ@†‰Œ…@@”‰Ž@”@“……‹@ƒŒ’‰”™@†’@”ˆ…@ƒ•’”@‰†@Ž……„@‚…N@Hf’@’…L@s……@m’•”ŒŒ@…‰Œ@†’@
TZPX@pm@cst@Ž@QRNTL@Ž„@p‰Œ™@’…“Ž“…L@…ƒˆ@‚…Œ—@‰Ž@”ˆ‰“@…‰Œ@ƒˆ‰ŽIN@
o pŒ‰Ž”‰††“²@’…“Ž“…Z@@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@„‰“‡’……@Ž„@„…ƒŒ‰Ž…@”@—‰”ˆ„’—@”ˆ“…@’…‘•…“”“N@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@‡’……@”ˆ”@‰”@‰“@‰Ž@
ŒŒ@’”‰…“²@‰Ž”…’…“”@”@‚”‰Ž@ƒŒ’‰”™@†’@”ˆ…@ƒ•’”@Ž@”ˆ‰“@‰““•…@Ž„@—‰”“@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”²“@”‰Ž@”@”ˆ”@
…††…ƒ”N@@@

™ HSI@g–…’Ž…Ž”@”ˆ‰Ž‹“@”ˆ”@“…@„ƒ•…Ž”“@“•‡ˆ”@‚™@Œ‰Ž”‰††“²@—’‰””…Ž@„‰“ƒ–…’™@‰“@’”…ƒ”…„@†’@„‰“ƒŒ“•’…@
‚™@”ˆ…@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@’‰–‰Œ…‡…[@—‰ŒŒ@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@‡’……@”@—‰”ˆ„’—@’…‘•…“”“@”@”ˆ…@…˜”…Ž”@”ˆ…™@”•ƒˆ@Ž@
„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@„ƒ•…Ž”“_@@i†@Ž”L@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”@‰Ž”…Ž„“@”@“……‹@ƒŒ’‰”™@†’@”ˆ…@ƒ•’”N@
o pŒ‰Ž”‰††“²@’…“Ž“…Z@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@Œ‰‹…Œ™@„‰“‡’……@—‰”ˆ@”ˆ…@“ƒ…@†@”ˆ…@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@“@Œ‰…„@”@
’”‰ƒ•Œ’@„ƒ•…Ž”“L@‚•”@’…‰Ž@ƒŽ†•“…„@‚•”@ˆ—@“……‹‰Ž‡@ƒŒ’‰”™@†’@”ˆ…@ƒ•’”@—•Œ„@—’‹@ˆ…’…@—O’O”@
„ƒ•…Ž”“@”ˆ”@ˆ–…@Ž”@™…”@‚……Ž@’„•ƒ…„@”@”ˆ…@Œ‰Ž”‰††“N@i“@‰”@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”²“@‰Ž”…Ž”‰Ž@”L@HaIL@
’„•ƒ…@„ƒ•…Ž”“@Ž„@@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@Œ‡@‰Ž@—ˆ‰ƒˆ@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@‰“@““…’”…„@–…’@–’‰•“@
„ƒ•…Ž”“L@”ˆ…Ž@“……‹@”@Œ‰”‰‡”…@”ˆ“…@“…ƒ‰†‰ƒ@„ƒ•…Ž”“_@@o’L@‰“@‰”@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”²“@‰Ž”…Ž”‰Ž@”L@HbIN@
Œ‰”‰‡”…@”ˆ…@‰““•…@†@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@‡…Ž…’ŒŒ™L@—‰”ˆ•”@’…†…’…Žƒ…@”@Ž™@“…ƒ‰†‰ƒ@„ƒ•…Ž”“_@i”@
—“@•ŽƒŒ…’@”@…@†’@”ˆ…@ƒŒŒ@—ˆ…”ˆ…’@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”²“@‰Ž”…Ž„…„@’“…„@”ˆ@—“@HaI@’@HbIN@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@
„@Ž”@”ˆ‰Ž‹@”‰Ž@HbI@‰“@’’‰”…·‰”@—•Œ„@‚…@„‰††‰ƒ•Œ”L@‰†@Ž”@‰““‰‚Œ…L@”@Œ‰”‰‡”…@@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@‰““•…@†@
Ž™@‹‰Ž„L@…“…ƒ‰ŒŒ™@”ˆ…@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@’‰–‰Œ…‡…L@—‰”ˆ•”@’…†…’…Žƒ…@”@“…ƒ‰†‰ƒ@„ƒ•…Ž”“N@@
7
 Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86-1 Filed 12/07/18 Page 9 of 11 PageID #: 3429

™ HTI@g–…’Ž…Ž”@—‰ŒŒ@‹…@”ˆ’……@—‰”Ž…““…“@–‰Œ‚Œ…@“@†ŒŒ—“Z@aŽ„…’“Ž@Ž@QROQRL@r‚…’”@l—@Ž@QROQSL@Ž„@
p’…Œ‡’@Ž@QROQXN@i“@“”‰ŒŒ@—’‹‰Ž‡@”@“ƒˆ…„•Œ…@c‰““ŽL@h‰Œ”Ž@Ž„@k–’‰‹N@g–…’Ž…Ž”@‚…Œ‰…–…“@k–’‰‹@„…@‰“@
„•Œ‰ƒ”‰–…L@“‰Žƒ…@“ˆ…²“@Œ’…„™@‚……Ž@„…“…„@‰Ž@r“N@g–…’Ž…Ž”²“@‚…Œ‰…–…“@”‹‰Ž‡@‚”ˆ@aŽ„…’“Ž@Ž„@
p’…Œ‡’²“@„…“‰”‰Ž@‰“@„•Œ‰ƒ”‰–…N@
o pŒ‰Ž”‰††“²@’…“Ž“…Z@@
" pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@„‰“‡’……@”ˆ”@k–’‰‹²“@„…“‰”‰Ž@‰“@„•Œ‰ƒ”‰–…·“ˆ…@—“@„…“…„@‰Ž@r“@—…ŒŒ@‚…†’…@
“•‚“”Ž”‰Œ@„ƒ•…Ž”“@’„•ƒ”‰Ž@—“@ƒŒ…”…N@@
" pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@„‰“‡’……@”ˆ”@”‹‰Ž‡@aŽ„…’“Ž²“@Ž„@p’…Œ‡’²“@„…“‰”‰Ž@‰“@„•Œ‰ƒ”‰–…@Ž„@‰Ž”…Ž„@”@
„…“…@‚”ˆN@@
" pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@’…@†‰’Œ™@“•’…@”ˆ”@QROQR@—’‹“@†’@aŽ„…’“Ž·—‰ŒŒ@†ŒŒ—@•@asap@”@ƒŽ†‰’N@@
" pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@’…@†‰’Œ™@“•’…@”ˆ”@QROQX@—’‹“@†’@p’…Œ‡’·—‰ŒŒ@†ŒŒ—@•@asap@”@ƒŽ†‰’N@@
™ pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@—•Œ„@’…†…’@”@„…“…@p’…Œ‡’@Ž„@aŽ„…’“Ž@—‰”ˆ‰Ž@@“ˆ’”…’@”‰…·—•Œ„@”ˆ…@
‡–…’Ž…Ž”@‡’……@”@‹…@p’…Œ‡’@–‰Œ‚Œ…@Ž@”ˆ…@QS”ˆ_@
" wˆ…”ˆ…’@Œ‰Ž”‰††“@’…@’…„™@”@’ƒ……„@Ž@r‚…’”@l—@„……Ž„“@Œ’‡…Œ™@Ž@”ˆ…@’…“Œ•”‰Ž@†@‰““•…@HSI@
‚–…·”@”ˆ…@…˜”…Ž”@”ˆ”@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”@‰Ž”…Ž„“@”@—‰”ˆˆŒ„@„ƒ•…Ž”“@…’”‰Ž…Ž”@”@r‚…’”@l—@
H’@Ž™@”ˆ…’@„…Ž…Ž”@†’@”ˆ”@””…’I@Ž@”ˆ…@‚“‰“@†@d…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@p’ƒ…““@p’‰–‰Œ…‡…L@”ˆ…@Œ‰Ž”‰††“@
—‰ŒŒ@Ž”@‚…@’…„™@”@’ƒ……„@—‰”ˆ@”ˆ…@„…“‰”‰Ž@†@l—@H’@Ž™@”ˆ…’@„…Ž…Ž”I@•Ž”‰Œ@‰”@ˆ“@”ˆ”@
„…Ž…Ž”“²@„ƒ•…Ž”“[@Ž„L@…’@p’‡’ˆ@YHcI@†@”ˆ…@‡’……„@„‰“ƒ–…’™@“ƒˆ…„•Œ…L@‰”@—•Œ„@‚…@
’…”•’…@”@”‹…@@„…“‰”‰Ž@‚…†’…@ˆ‰“@’@ˆ…’@„ƒ•…Ž”“@’…@’„•ƒ…„N@

™ HUI@g–…’Ž…Ž”@—‰ŒŒ@Œ‰‹…Œ™@’…’…“…Ž”@eŒ‰Ž…@d•‹…@”@ˆ…’@„…“‰”‰ŽL@‚•”@—‰ŒŒ@Ž”@ƒƒ…”@“…’–‰ƒ…@Ž@ˆ…’@‚…ˆŒ†N@
pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@—‰ŒŒ@†’—’„@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”@@“…’–‰ƒ…@ƒ™@†@d•‹…²“@“•‚…Ž@Žƒ…@“…’–…„@HŒ‰Ž”‰††“@ˆ–…@‚……Ž@
””…”‰Ž‡@“…’–‰ƒ…@†’@„™“IN@

™ HVI@g–…’Ž…Ž”@„…“@Ž”@‹Ž—@†’@“•’…@—ˆ…”ˆ…’@‰”@—‰ŒŒ@ƒŒ‰@‰Ž@s‡…”@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@–…’@
„ƒ•…Ž”“@„………„@Ž”@ƒ–…’…„@‚™@”ˆ…@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@‰Ž@r“@Ž„@‰Ž@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“²@““…““‰Ž@‰Ž@s‡…”@H‰N…N@„ƒ•…Ž”“@
’„•ƒ…„@—‰”ˆ@@³dpp´@‚”…“@’…†‰˜IN@@j…@—‰ŒŒ@†ŒŒ—@•@—‰”ˆ@g…††N@

™ HWI@p’”…ƒ”‰–…@o’„…’·g…††@—‰ŒŒ@Œ‹@”@”ˆ…@Ž…@j…@’…–‰•“Œ™@“…Ž”@Ž„@’…–…’”@‚ƒ‹@—‰”ˆ@ƒ…Ž”“N@m™@‹…@
“…Ž“…@”@ˆŒ„@††@Ž@†‰Œ‰Ž‡@”‰ŒŒ@‰““•…@†@„…Œ‰‚…’”‰–…@’ƒ…““@’‰–‰Œ…‡…@‰“@’…“Œ–…„N@

g…††’…™@mN@p‰Œ™@
m™…’@b’—Ž@llp
t…ŒZ@KQMSQRMWPQMWYPR
‡‰Œ™`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ
———N™…’‚’—ŽNƒ@@

f’Z@p‰Œ™L@g…††’…™@@
s…Ž”Z@t•…“„™L@d…ƒ…‚…’@PTL@RPQX@TZQW@pm@
t•Z@Gm’•”ŒŒL@j“…ˆ@HusanyeIG@\j“…ˆNm’•”ŒŒ`•“„ŠN‡–^[@n……”šL@m‰’‰@rN@\mn……”š`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@
‰’`‹‹—”Œ—Nƒ[@k…–‰Ž@aN@g’…‡‡@\k‡’…‡‡`‹‹”Œ—Nƒ^[@s…ŠŒ@z”@\“…ŠŒ`Ž‰ŽŒ‡N’‡^[@f’”Ž…™L@j‰ŒŒ@mN@
\jf’”Ž…™`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@f…’’L@cˆ’‰“”ˆ…’@\cf…’’`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@kŽ‰‡ˆ”L@cˆ’‰“”ˆ…’@aN@
\ckŽ‰‡ˆ”`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@i’@k•’š‚Ž@\‰’`‹‹”Œ—Nƒ^@
cƒZ@cˆL@j…“@HusanyeI@\j…“Ncˆ`•“„ŠN‡–^@
s•‚Š…ƒ”Z@reZ@s‡…”@M@„‰“ƒ–…’™@’…Œ”…„@”@”ˆ…@wˆ‰”…@h•“…@

j…L@

i@@—’‹‰Ž‡@Ž@@“•’™@†@•’@ƒŒŒ@Ž—[@™@…‰Œ@‰ŽƒŒ•„…“@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“²@’…“Ž“…@”@”ˆ…@’…‘•…“”@‚…Œ—N@
8
 Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86-1 Filed 12/07/18 Page 10 of 11 PageID #: 3430

i@’…ƒŒŒ@†’@•’@ƒŽ–…’“”‰Ž@”ˆ”@™•@…Ž”‰Ž…„@”—@‚“…“@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”@‚…Œ‰…–…“@’”…ƒ”“@”ˆ…@wˆ‰”…@h•“…@†’@
„‰“ƒ–…’™Z@‚•’„…Ž“…Ž…““@Ž„@’‰–‰Œ…‡…N@

oŽ@•’@ˆŽ…@ƒŒŒL@™•@…Ž”‰Ž…„@“…ƒ‰†‰ƒ@rfp“@Ž„@iŽ”…’’‡”’‰…“L@‚•”@i@„Ž²”@’…ƒŒŒ@™•@…Ž”‰Ž‰Ž‡@“…ƒ‰†‰ƒ@rfa“N@@s@i@
ƒŽ@’…’Œ™@•Ž„…’“”Ž„@™•’@“‰”‰Ž@Ž„@’…“Ž„@”@‰”L@ƒŽ@™•@ƒŒ’‰†™@™•’@’…†…’…Žƒ…@”@rfa“@QMQQ_@@i“@‰”@”ˆ…@
‡–…’Ž…Ž”²“@“‰”‰Ž@”ˆ”@„‰””‰Ž‡@’@„…Ž™‰Ž‡@”ˆ”@”ˆ…@p’…“‰„…Ž”@„…@ƒ…’”‰Ž@“””……Ž”“@‰“@•Ž„•Œ™@‚•’„…Ž“…@
•Ž„…’@cˆ…Ž…™_@i“@‰”@”ˆ…@‡–…’Ž…Ž”²“@“‰”‰Ž@”ˆ”@„‰””‰Ž‡@’@„…Ž™‰Ž‡@”ˆ”@”ˆ…@p’…“‰„…Ž”@„…@ƒ…’”‰Ž@“””……Ž”“@‰“@
’”…ƒ”…„@‚™@’‰–‰Œ…‡…L@…–…Ž@”@@……”‰Ž‡@”@—ˆ‰ƒˆ@…‚…’“@†@cŽ‡’…““@—…’…@’…“…Ž”@H“……@rfa“@UMQQ_IN@

tˆŽ‹“L

g…††’…™@mN@p‰Œ™@
m™…’@b’—Ž@llp
t…ŒZ@KQMSQRMWPQMWYPR
‡‰Œ™`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ
———N™…’‚’—ŽNƒ@@

f’Z@m’•”ŒŒL@j“…ˆ@HusanyeI@\j“…ˆNm’•”ŒŒ`•“„ŠN‡–^@@
s…Ž”Z@t•…“„™L@d…ƒ…‚…’@PTL@RPQX@TZPX@pm@
t•Z@p‰Œ™L@g…††’…™@\gp‰Œ™`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@n……”šL@m‰’‰@rN@\mn……”š`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@
‰’`‹‹—”Œ—Nƒ[@k…–‰Ž@aN@g’…‡‡@\k‡’…‡‡`‹‹”Œ—Nƒ^[@s…ŠŒ@z”@\“…ŠŒ`Ž‰ŽŒ‡N’‡^[@f’”Ž…™L@j‰ŒŒ@mN@
\jf’”Ž…™`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@f…’’L@cˆ’‰“”ˆ…’@\cf…’’`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@kŽ‰‡ˆ”L@cˆ’‰“”ˆ…’@aN@
\ckŽ‰‡ˆ”`™…’‚’—ŽNƒ^[@i’@k•’š‚Ž@\‰’`‹‹”Œ—Nƒ^@
cƒZ@cˆL@j…“@HusanyeI@\j…“Ncˆ`•“„ŠN‡–^@
s•‚Š…ƒ”Z@s‡…”@M@„‰“ƒ–…’™@’…Œ”…„@”@”ˆ…@wˆ‰”…@h•“…@

JJexternal@senderJJ

c•Ž“…ŒL@

a“@„‰“ƒ•““…„L@Œ…“…@„–‰“…L@‚™@ŽŽ@”’’—L@‰†@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“@—‰ŒŒ@‡’……@”@—‰”ˆ„’—@ŒŒ@„‰“ƒ–…’™@’…‘•…“”“@ƒŽƒ…’Ž‰Ž‡@”ˆ…@
wˆ‰”…@h•“…N@@s…ƒ‰†‰ƒŒŒ™L@”ˆ‰“@‰ŽƒŒ•„…“@”ˆ…@’…‘•…“”“@„…@ƒŽƒ…’Ž‰Ž‡@”ˆ…@wˆ‰”…@h•“…L@”ˆ…@p’…“‰„…Ž”L@Ž„@”ˆ…@
e˜…ƒ•”‰–…@o††‰ƒ…@†@”ˆ…@p’…“‰„…Ž”L@†•Ž„@”@r…‘•…“”@†’@p’„•ƒ”‰Ž@H³rfp´I@XL@QQL@QSL@QXL@RSL@RT[@“@—…ŒŒ@“@iŽ”…’’‡”’™@
Ž“N@QMVL@Y[@Ž„@r…‘•…“”“@†’@a„‰““‰Ž“@n“N@QMQQN@

a“@„‰“ƒ•““…„L@pŒ‰Ž”‰††“²@’…‘•…“”“@—•Œ„@‰“…@Ž@•Ž„•…@‚•’„…Ž@Ž@”ˆ…@wˆ‰”…@h•“…@”ˆ”@‰“@‰’’…ƒŽƒ‰Œ‚Œ…@—‰”ˆ@”ˆ…@
s•’……@c•’”²“@‡•‰„Žƒ…@‰Ž@cˆ…Ž…™@–N@uNsN@d‰“”N@c•’”@†’@”ˆ…@d‰“”N@†@cŒ•‚‰L@UTR@uNsN@SVWL@SXU@HRPPTI@Ž„@‰”“@
’‡…Ž™N@@@

tˆŽ‹“L@
j…@

_______________________________
Joseph A. Marutollo
Assistant United States Attorney
Chief, Immigration Litigation
United States Attorney’s Office
Eastern District of New York
271-A Cadman Plaza East, 7th Floor
Brooklyn, New York 11201
9
 Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86-1 Filed 12/07/18 Page 11 of 11 PageID #: 3431
Telephone: (718) 254-6288
Fax: (718) 254-7489
Joseph.marutollo@usdoj.gov

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••@@
tˆ‰“@…‰Œ@Ž„@Ž™@†‰Œ…“@”’Ž“‰””…„@—‰”ˆ@‰”@’…@‰Ž”…Ž„…„@“Œ…Œ™@†’@”ˆ…@•“…@†@”ˆ…@‰Ž„‰–‰„•Œ@’@…Ž”‰”™@”@—ˆ@”ˆ…™@’…@
„„’…““…„N@i†@™•@ˆ–…@’…ƒ…‰–…„@”ˆ‰“@…‰Œ@‰Ž@…’’’@Œ…“…@Ž”‰†™@”ˆ…@“™“”…@Ž‡…’N@i†@™•@’…@Ž”@”ˆ…@Ž…„@
„„’…““……@™•@“ˆ•Œ„@Ž”@„‰““…‰Ž”…L@„‰“”’‰‚•”…@’@ƒ™@”ˆ‰“@…M‰ŒN@

m™…’@b’—Ž@‰“@@‡Œ‚Œ@“…’–‰ƒ…“@’–‰„…’@ƒ’‰“‰Ž‡@Ž@““ƒ‰”‰Ž@†@Œ…‡Œ@’ƒ”‰ƒ…“@”ˆ”@’…@“…’”…@…Ž”‰”‰…“L@
‰ŽƒŒ•„‰Ž‡@m™…’@b’—Ž@llp@HiŒŒ‰Ž‰“L@usaIL@m™…’@b’—Ž@iŽ”…’Ž”‰ŽŒ@llp@HeŽ‡ŒŽ„IL@m™…’@b’—Ž@H@hŽ‡@kŽ‡@
’”Ž…’“ˆ‰I@Ž„@t•‰Œ@F@cˆ…‘•…’@a„–‡„“@H@b’š‰Œ‰Ž@’”Ž…’“ˆ‰IN@

iŽ†’”‰Ž@‚•”@ˆ—@—…@ˆŽ„Œ…@…’“ŽŒ@‰Ž†’”‰Ž@‰“@–‰Œ‚Œ…@‰Ž@•’@p’‰–ƒ™@n”‰ƒ…N@

10
Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86-2 Filed 12/07/18 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 3432

Exhibit B
Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document
Case 1:18-cv-02921-JMF 86-2 241
Document Filed 12/07/18 Page Page
Filed 08/14/18 2 of 51PageID
of 4 #: 3433

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- X
: $,#%("%#$,
STATE OF NEW YORK, et al., :
:
Plaintiff, :
: 18-CV-2921 (JMF)
-v- :
:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, et al., :
:
Defendants. :
:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- :
:
NEW YORK IMMIGRATION COALITION, et al., :
:
Plaintiff, :
: 18-CV-5025 (JMF)
-v- :
:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, et al., : ORDER
:
Defendants. :
:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- X

JESSE M. FURMAN, United States District Judge:

In a letter motion dated August 2, 2018, Plaintiffs in these actions — which challenge the

Government’s decision to reinstate a question about citizenship on the 2020 decennial census —

raised several discovery disputes. (18-CV-2921, Docket No. 220 (“Pls.’ Letter”)). Defendants

responded by letter dated August 7, 2018. (18-CV-2921, Docket No. 229 (“Defs.’ Letter”); see

also 18-CV-2921, Docket No. 231 (“Corrected Abowd Decl.”)). 1 On August 13, 2018, Plaintiffs

filed another letter motion, seeking three forms of relief, two of which overlap with the relief that

1
Plaintiffs also filed a letter motion, dated August 10, 2018, seeking an order compelling
Defendants to make John Gore, Acting Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, available for
deposition. (18-CV-2921, Docket No. 236). Pursuant to the Court’s Order of July 5, 2018 (18-
CV-2921, Docket No. 199), Defendants shall respond to that letter motion by August 15, 2018.
Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document
Case 1:18-cv-02921-JMF 86-2 241
Document Filed 12/07/18 Page Page
Filed 08/14/18 3 of 52PageID
of 4 #: 3434

they sought in their August 2, 2018 Letter. (18-CV-2921, Docket No. 237 (“Pls.’ 2d Letter”)).

Upon review of the parties’ letters and applicable case law, the Court concludes that there

is no need for a conference at this time. Instead, the parties’ disputes are addressed as follows:

1. Deliberative-Process Privilege (See Pls.’ Letter 1-2; Defs.’ Letter 1-2)

a. Substantially for the reasons stated by Magistrate Judge Parker in Winfield v. City
of New York, No. 15-CV-5236 (KHP) (LTS), 2018 WL 716013, at *5 (S.D.N.Y.
Feb. 1, 2018), the Court concludes that a “balancing approach that considers the
competing interests of the party seeking disclosure and of the government —
specifically, its need to engage in policy deliberations without the omnipresent
threat of disclosure — is more appropriate than a per se rule” providing that the
deliberative-process privilege does not apply to any claim challenging
governmental decisionmaking. See also, e.g., In re Delphi Corp., 276 F.R.D. 81,
85 (S.D.N.Y. 2011). Accordingly, to the extent Plaintiffs’ letter motion
challenges Defendants’ invocation of the privilege on the ground that it is
categorically unavailable in these cases, the motion is denied.

b. Substantially for the reasons set forth in Defendants’ letter, the Court also rejects
Plaintiffs’ argument that the deliberative-process privilege is unavailable for any
and all documents generated after May 1, 2017. Put simply, Secretary Ross’s e-
mail of that date does not constitute a “final” agency decision. Accordingly,
documents generated after that date could conceivably qualify as “pre-decisional”
for purpose of the privilege and must be assessed individually.

c. The Court declines to reach Plaintiffs’ remaining arguments concerning

Defendants’ invocation of the deliberative-process privilege — namely, that the
privilege is “overcome in this case” and that “many of the documents over which
Defendants have asserted privilege do not appear to be ‘deliberative’” (Pls.’ Letter
2) — as they require particularized consideration of the documents at issue, see,
e.g., Pub. Emps. for Envtl. Responsibility v. Envtl. Prot. Agency, 213 F. Supp. 3d
1, 11 (D.D.C. 2016) (“[T]he deliberative process privilege is so dependent upon
the individual document and the role it plays in the administrative process.”
(internal quotation marks omitted)), and they have not been adequately briefed by
the parties in their letters, let alone using the balancing approach discussed above.
Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ motion with respect to the deliberative-process privilege
is denied without prejudice to renewal, in accordance with the Court’s Order of
July 5, 2018, and the Court’s Individual Rules and Practices for Civil Cases, as to
specific documents or categories of documents.

2
Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document
Case 1:18-cv-02921-JMF 86-2 241
Document Filed 12/07/18 Page Page
Filed 08/14/18 4 of 53PageID
of 4 #: 3435

2. Title 13 (See Pls.’ Letter 1-2; Defs.’ Letter 1-2; Pls.’ 2d Letter 1-2)

Title 13 of the United States Code prohibits Defendants from disclosing any document or
information “whereby the data furnished by any particular establishment or individual
under this title can be identified.” 13 U.S.C. § 9(a)(2); see also Baldrige v. Shapiro, 455
U.S. 345, 348 (1982). The Court agrees with Defendants that that provision must be read
to protect not only “raw census data,” but also “intermediate work product” that “can be
used in combination with” other publicly available documents or data “to re-identify
individual respondents and their data items.” (Corrected Abowd Decl. ¶ 18).
Nevertheless, the Court agrees with Plaintiffs that, in order to withhold otherwise
discoverable information, Defendants must do more than merely assert in conclusory
fashion that the information could, in combination with other, unspecified information be
used to identify any particular respondent. 2 That said, Plaintiffs no longer seek an order
requiring immediate disclosure of the materials at issue; instead, they seek an order
requiring Defendants to submit the materials to the Census Bureau’s Disclosure Review
Board (“DRB”) “for expeditious review at its next scheduled meeting.” (Pls.’ 2d Letter
1). That request is GRANTED. Further, Defendants shall work with Plaintiffs’ counsel
in good faith to identify documents for priority processing in the event that DRB review
must be sequenced. Finally, assuming that AR 10462, AR 10913, and AR 11025 are not
subject to any claim of privilege (see id. at 2), Defendants shall produce those
documents by 7 p.m. TODAY so that they may be used in connection with the
deposition of Dr. Abowd, scheduled for tomorrow, (see id.).

3. Local Rule 26.2 and Rule 26(b)(5)(A) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (See
Pls.’ Letter 3; Defs.’ Letter 3; Pls.’ 2d Letter 2-3)

Substantially for the reasons stated in Defendants’ letter, the Court declines Plaintiffs’
invitation to find, at this time, that Defendants have waived their privilege claims by
producing an inadequate privilege log. Defendants represent that they are working
diligently to cure any inadequacies in their log (see Defs.’ Letter 3), and the Court

2
At present, that is all Defendants do here, as they rely exclusively on a declaration from
the Census Bureau’s Chief Scientist explaining, in general terms, what “intermediate work
product” is and then identifying certain documents as “intermediate work product.” (Corrected
Abowd Decl. ¶¶ 18-25). Moreover, based on a quick review, the Court is skeptical that Title 13
protects all of the information that Defendants have claimed. For instance, Defendants redacted
the following information from a memorandum prepared by the Census Bureau’s Chief Scientist
for its Acting Director: (1) the incremental cost of maintaining the status quo data collection and
preparing a special analysis for the Department of Justice to best estimate citizen voting age
population; (2) the Census Bureau’s estimate, based on response rates to the annual American
Community Survey and the short-form census, as to the percentage decrease response rate
caused by including the citizenship question; (3) the estimated cost of including the citizenship
question on the 2020 census; and (4) percentage estimates comparing the racial and demographic
makeup of non-citizens to citizens. (See Pls’ Letter, Ex. 4-A). At first glance, it is hard to
understand how that information, even in conjunction with other public information, could be
used to identify individual respondents and their data items.
3
Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document
Case 1:18-cv-02921-JMF 86-2 241
Document Filed 12/07/18 Page Page
Filed 08/14/18 5 of 54PageID
of 4 #: 3436

concludes that they should be given a limited opportunity to do so. Notably, SEC v.
Yorkville Advisors, LLC, 300 F.R.D. 152, 162 (S.D.N.Y. 2014), upon which Plaintiffs
rely, does not suggest otherwise, as the court in that case found a waiver only after the
offending party had been given multiple opportunities to cure. That said, given the tight
discovery deadlines in these cases, the Court agrees with Plaintiffs that there is a need for
finality as soon as possible. Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ motions with regard to the privilege
log are denied, except that Defendants shall cure any inadequacies in their privilege log
no later than August 21, 2018. Failure to do so as to any particular document may
result in a waiver of any claim of privilege as to that document.

4. The Work-Product Doctrine (See Pls.’ Letter 3; Defs.’ Letter 3)

The Court need not and does not resolve the parties’ dispute concerning the applicability
of the work product doctrine, as Defendants invoke other grounds to withhold the three
documents still in dispute. (See Defs.’ Letter 3). Unless and until Plaintiffs prevail in
arguing that these other grounds do not justify withholding the documents, the parties’
dispute over the work-product doctrine is purely academic.

5. The Administrative Record (See Pls.’ 2d Letter 3)

In their letter motion filed yesterday, Plaintiffs contend that there is reason to believe that
there are materials that should have been in the Administrative Record that have not been
produced. Plaintiffs’ allegations are troubling, but the Court will withhold judgment until
Defendants have an opportunity to respond. Defendants shall do so by TOMORROW
at 5 p.m. (Given the rulings above, there is no need for Defendants to respond to the
portions of Plaintiffs’ most recent letter motion concerning Title 13 and the privilege
log.) Defendants are cautioned that the Court will not look kindly on late production of
materials that should have been produced by the (once extended) July 26, 2018 deadline
to supplement the Administrative Record.

The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate 18-CV-2921, Docket No. 220, and 18-CV-

5025, Docket No. 73.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 14, 2018

New York, New York

4
Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86-3 Filed 12/07/18 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 3437

Exhibit C

AMECURRENT 730739063.1 6-Dec-18 16:09

 Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document
Case 3:18-cv-01554-EMC 86-3 Filed
Document 12/07/18
53 Filed PagePage
08/02/18 2 of 31PageID
of 2 #: 3438

4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7 CRISTA RAMOS, et al., Case No. 18-cv-01554-EMC (SK)

8 Plaintiffs,
SECOND ORDER REGARDING
9 v. DISCOVERY LETTER BRIEF
10 KIRSTJEN NIELSEN, et al.,
Regarding Docket Nos. 43, 47
11 Defendants.

12 The parties in this matter have raised several discovery issues for the Court. On August 1,
Northern District of California
United States District Court

13 2018, the Court issued an order addressing some but not all of the issues. (Dkt. 49.) This Order
14 clarifies that Order.
15 9PYZ[& ^P[O YLNHYK [V 7LMLUKHU[Zc WYVK\J[PVU VM KVJ\TLU[Z YLZWVUZP]L [V PlaintifMZc
16 Request for Production Nos. 1, 4, 6 and 7, the Court ORDERS Defendants to complete that
17 production by August 16, 2018. The District Court on June 25, 2018, ordered that the production
18 of documents responsive to Request for Production Nos. 1, 4, 6 and IL JVTWSL[LK ^P[OPU a*- KH`Z
19 VM [OL OLHYPUN KH[L(b $7R[( 34.) The Court has reviewed the requests at issue and finds that the
20 requests are targeted and reasonable, proportional to the needs of the case at this stage of litigation.
21 There is no valid reasVU [V JOHUNL [OL 7PZ[YPJ[ 6V\Y[cZ Y\SPUN VU <\UL +.& +)*1( The Court
22 ORDERS Defendants to produce documents responsive to Request for Production Nos. 1, 4, 6 and
23 7 by August 16, 2018. However, with regard to the other documents, the Court will not set a
24 deadline at this time but will review the issue after the District Court decides the preliminary
25 injunction issue.
26 Second, with regard to the issue of redaction for non-responsiveness, Plaintiffs requested a
27 clarification of the August 1, 2018 Order to determine whether Defendants could redact
28 documents and attachments on the basis of non-responsiveness. The Court rules that Defendants
Case 1:18-cv-01599-WFK-ST Document 86-3 Filed 12/07/18 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 3439