USDC Cr. No. 84-3552


    v.                                 Civil Action No. 84-3552

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,                FILED
           Defendants.                           JUL 9 1986
                                    CLERK, U.S. DISTRlCT COURT
                                         DlSTRlCT OF COLUMBlA


This case having come before tbe undersigned U.S. Magistrate on June 26, 1986, the plaintiff representing himself pro se, the Federal defendants represented by AUSA John D. Bates and AUSA Michael L. Martinez and Captain Michael Canfield, represented by Assistant Corporation Counsel Candida Staempfli, and upon consideration of the representations and colloquy had, the pervious motions involving discovery and other pretrial issues, and a review of the complete record, it is now hereby this 9th day of July, 1996


1. That the deposition of the defendant Michael Canfield occur in Courtroom 25, U. S. District Court, on July 10, 1986 at 2:00 p.m.

2. The depositions of the officials of the United States be deferred until after the Federdal defendants have responded to plaintiff's document discovery requests, this to be done by 4:00 p.m. on July 14, 1986, the plaintiff's motion to compel production of documents, filed June 19, 1986 having been withdrawn -- and plaintiff having filed a motion on June 20, 1986, to expedite discovery, that motion having been resolved by the Magistrate's oral ruling on June 26, 1986 that the Federal defendants shall produce all documents, not privileged, which are relevant to the issues which now remain in this case, pursuant to the Court's Order of June 5, 1986, by the deadline then set as reflected above, but in all other respects plaintiff's motion to expedite discovery is DENIED.


3. That based on plaintiff's statements at the hearing on June 26, 1986 no Federal defendant, other than the defendant James C. Lindsey, Former Deputy Chief, U.S. Park Police, is being sued in his personal capacity, and that as to all other Federal defendants only declaratory relief and injunctive relief are requested.

4. As to the Federal defendant James C. Lindsey, plaintiff William Thomas shall file a more definite statement as to the facts supporting his theory for suing him in his personal capacity and for money damages, this to be done by 4:00 p.m., July 14, 1986.

5. As to each of the named Federal defendants, the plaintiff, William Thomas, shall file a separate factual statement as to each named defendant as to the acts and facts he claims constituted misconduct or other wrongdoing which would show that any of them conspired to deprive him of his civil rights and whether any of these defendants individually committed any unconstitutional acts toward him, including whether any of the defendants engaged in alleged acts constituting unconstitutional excesses in their efforts to arrest him or in the alleged seizure and destruction of any of his property, this to be done no later than 4:00 p.m., July 21, 1986. Such statements by William, Thamas shall furnish specific factual details as to dates and actual individual conduct as to each Federal defendant which he claims was wrong and violated his civil rights and/or his constitutional rights. Conclusory allegations and statements shall not be used.


6. Counsel for the Federal defendants shall file a memorandum of law in support of their objection to plaintiff's request to depose Assistant Solicitor Richard Robbins and Manus Fish, Regional Director, National Park Service, Department of Interior, and specifically address the legal issue whether a party may depose a Federal agency official and/or counsel as to purpose and motive for promulgation of regulations, especially in a situation where those regulations have been held to be constitutional. See Clark v, Community for Creative Non-Violence, U.S. , 104 S. Ct 3065 (1984); White House Vigil for the ERA Ccmmittee v. Clark, 746 F, 2d 1518 (D.C. Cir. 1984); United States v. Thomas, Nos 83-1769 etc. (D.C. Cir. December 21, 1984). Special note should be made of the fact that Mr. Robbins testified in White House Vigil v. Clark, 746 F. 2d 1518, 1527 and nn. 3, 74, supra, as to a conversation he had with former Secretary of Interior James G. Watt as to motivation behind the regulations at issue. See also deposition of Richard Robbins of November 21, 1983, Docket No. 198 in the White House Vigil case in the District Court, C.A. No. 83-1243.

7. Plaintiff's motion for default judgment against the Federal defendants, filed June 19, 1986, is hereby DENIED, the Federal defendants to file an Answer within ten (10) days after receiving the plaintiff's detailed factual statement of acts and facts as to each Federal defendant separately stated as required by Paragraph 5 hereof.

8. The plaintiff's motion for an Order for subpoenas to issue to the Freedom of Information Act Officers of the U.S. Secret Service, the Department of Interior, the National Park Service, the United States Park Police and the White House to produce documents is hereby DENIED, without prejudice to


plaintiff filing a request under Rule 34, Federal Rules of Civil procedure, to supplement the doclments requested, after reviewing the documents and records to be produced by the Federal defendants on or before 4:00 p.m., July 14, 1986.

9. Plaintiff's Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order, filed June 18, 1986, in view of the Federal defendant's opposition filed June 20, 1986, and the entire court record, and in view of the Court's broad delegation under 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(l)(A), to the Magistrate, is hereby DENIED, as the plaintiff cannot show any threat of imnediate, irreparable harm in light of his delay of three (3) months in challenging the latest regulation at issue and in view of the expedited discovery, dispositive motion and trial schedule set by the Court in its Orders of June 5, 1986 and June 25, 1986 and by the Magistrate in his Order of June 14, 1986 and in this Order.

10. Plaintiff's Motion for clarification, filed June 27, 1986, is hereby DENIED as moot as a result: of the rulings in this Order set forth above.

11. Plaintiff's Expedited Request for Transcript of the hearing before the undersigned U.S. Magistrate on June 26, 1986 is hereby DENIED, without prejudice to the plaintiff coming to court to listen to the tape recording at a time arranged with the Magistrate's Courtroom deputy (Mrs. Dorothy Nathans - 535-3550) or making a duplicate tape after making the necessary arrangements with Mrs. Dorthoy Nathans and obtaining an Order from the Magistrate to bring a tape recorder to Courtroom 5, for this purpose.

12. Plaintiff's Motion for Clarification or Reconsideration in the wake of the June 26th Hearing, filed June 30, 1986, is hereby DENIED in view of the ruling made herein.


13. Counsel for the Federal deferdants shall consult with the following individuals, whom plaintiff desires to depose, to determine their availability for depositions in the interval between July 21, 1986 and August 6, 1986 and advise Ms. Dorothy Nathans, the Magistrate's Courtroam Deputy (535-3550) on or before July 18, 1986 of the dates of their availability so that their depositions may be scheduled during this period:

James C. Lindsey
Former Deputy Chief
U.S. Park Police

Jerry S. Parr
Special Agent
U.S. Secret Service

Mr. James I. McDaniel
Assistant Regional Director
National Park Service

Lt. Christopher Merillat
U.S. Park Police

Sergeant Thomas Bradley
U.S. Park Police

Officer J. R. James
U.S. Park Police

Officer Pamela Jackson
U.S. Park Police

Officer David Haynes
U.S. Park Police

Mr. A. C. Thomas
Property Office
U.S. Park Police


Should counsel for the Federal defendants object to producing any of the above persons because the named individual is no longer subject to their oontrol, the named individual has no knowledge of facts relevant to the issues which now remain in the case, or there are any other reasons which would support a motion for a protective order, such a motion shall be filed as to such individual or individuals no later than 4:00 p.m., July 18, 1986.

14. The plaintiff and counsel for the defendants shall diligently endeavor to comply with all deadlines set herein, as extensions will not be lightly granted in view of the tight schedule established by the Court, with a trial date of October 20, 1986, and in view of the age of this case, having been filed on Novepnber 21, 1984, and tbe nature of the legal and constitutional issues presented.

U.S. Magistrate
Date: July 9, 1986

Case Listing --- Proposition One ---- Peace Park