Court filing

Amended Pretrial Scheduling and Litigation Management Order in a Criminal Case — United States v. Aden (Dkt. 58, D. Minn.)

Summary

An amended pretrial scheduling and litigation management order of U.S. Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty in United States v. Moktar Hassan Aden, et al., Case No. 25-cr-349 (JWB/JFD), in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, dated and filed February 9, 2026 as Doc. 58. It grants the defendants' unopposed Motion to Continue Pretrial Motions Filing Date (Dkt. No. 57). The order notes that the indictment was returned on September 17, 2025, that all defendants have been arraigned, that the case is designated complex, and that the new dates reflect a November 12, 2025 status conference. It advises the United States of its disclosure obligation under the Due Process Protections Act and finds under 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(7)(A) that the ends of justice outweigh the interest in a speedy trial.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Filed February 9, 2026 in Moktar Hassan Aden; one of 2 filings from this case.

Record facts

Court	U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota
Filed	2026-02-09

Cite this document

“Amended Pretrial Scheduling and Litigation Management Order in a Criminal Case — United States v. Aden (Dkt. 58, D. Minn.).” U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, No. 0:25-cr-00349, Doc. 58, filed 2026-02-09. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/court-filings/full-docket-moktar-hassan-aden-mnd-227852/2026-02-09-gov-uscourts-mnd-227852-58-0-doc-58/, SHA-256 5314627f2406094e085393034189f3b943e7c4d4ce3e59db97ff3b64c66e2e90.

Full text

CASE 0:25-cr-00349-JWB-JFD Doc. 58 Filed 02/09/26 Page 1 of 8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

United States of America,
Case. No. 25-cr-349 (JWB/JFD)
Plaintiff,

v. AMENDED PRETRIAL
SCHEDULING AND LITIGATION
Moktar Hassan Aden (1), Mustafa Dayib Ali MANAGEMENT ORDER
(2), Khalid Ahmed Dayib (3), Abdifitah IN A CRIMINAL CASE
Mohamud Mohamed (4),

Defendants.

This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Continue Pretrial Motions

Filing Date (Dkt. No. 57). The United States does not oppose the motion. For the reasons

set forth in the Motion, the Motion is GRANTED. The Court now enters the following

Amended Pretrial Scheduling and Litigation Management Order.

A grand jury of this District returned an indictment in this case on September 17,

2025 (Dkt. No. 1). All defendants have been arraigned. This matter has been designated

as complex. On November 12, 2025, the Court held a status conference to discuss

scheduling. The dates and deadlines in this order reflect the discussion from that status

conference.

I. Due Process Protections Act

Pursuant to the Due Process Protections Act, the Court advises the United States of

its obligation to disclose to the defendant all exculpatory evidence as required by Brady v.

CASE 0:25-cr-00349-JWB-JFD Doc. 58 Filed 02/09/26 Page 2 of 8

Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150, 153-55 (1972), and

their progeny, and ORDERS the United States to disclose all such evidence. Failure to do

so in a timely manner may result in consequences, including, but not limited to, exclusion

of evidence, adverse jury instructions, dismissal of charges, contempt proceedings,

disciplinary action, or sanctions by the Court.

II. Scheduling and Discovery Requirements

Pursuant to Local Rule 12.1, the Court enters the following Order regarding

scheduling and discovery. This Order is designed to eliminate the need for the filing of

“routine” non-dispositive discovery motions. However, either party may file additional

non-dispositive motions if counsel deems the motion to be appropriate and non-duplicative

of this Order: Any non-dispositive motions must be filed and served on or before May 4,

2026. All responses to motions must be filed by May 18, 2026.

A. Rule 16 Discovery. A motion is not required for discovery under Federal

Rule of Criminal Procedure 16. Section (a) of that Rule requires the United States to

provide discovery upon a defendant’s request, not upon a motion or upon a court’s order.

Likewise, Rule 16(b) requires the defense in a criminal case to provide reciprocal discovery

if the United States complies with defense discovery requests. The Court expects the parties

to provide discovery promptly and without a court order, in compliance with Local Rule

12.1(a). The United States must make all disclosures required by Federal Rule of Criminal

Procedure 16(a) by October 6, 2025. D. Minn. LR 12.1(a)(1). The defense must make all

CASE 0:25-cr-00349-JWB-JFD Doc. 58 Filed 02/09/26 Page 3 of 8

disclosures required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16(b) by November 26, 2025.

D. Minn. LR 12.1(a)(2). These deadlines have passed.

B. Disclosure of Brady/Giglio Materials. The United States must comply with

its constitutional obligation to disclose any information known to it that is material to guilt

or punishment, whether this information is requested or not. Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S.

83 (1963); Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972).

C. Preservation of Rough Notes. The United States is ordered to instruct

agents and law enforcement officers that participated in the investigation to preserve their

rough notes relevant to the investigation. If at a later date the discoverability of those notes

becomes an issue, the Court will rule on the issue at that time.

D. Early Disclosure of Jencks Act Material. The Court has no authority to

order disclosure of Jencks Act material until a witness has testified on direct examination.

18 U.S.C. § 3500. However, to avoid unnecessary delay of a hearing or trial, the Court

urges early disclosure of witness statements.

E. Notice and Disclosure of Rule 404(b) Evidence. No court order is needed

before the United States is required to give notice of intent to use Rule 404(b) and disclose

the evidence whose admission will be sought. Rule 404(b) provides that “upon request by

the accused, the prosecution in a criminal case shall provide reasonable notice in advance

of trial, or during trial if the court excuses pretrial notice on good cause shown, of the

general nature of any such evidence it intends to introduce at trial.” Fed. R. Evid. 404(b).

Upon defense request, the United States must, without a court order, give notice of its intent

CASE 0:25-cr-00349-JWB-JFD Doc. 58 Filed 02/09/26 Page 4 of 8

to use Rule 404(b) and disclose the evidence whose admission is sought no later than 21

days before trial.

F. Notice of Rule 12 Defenses. A motion is not required in order for the

defense in a criminal case to be required to give the United States advance notice of the

affirmative defenses of Alibi (Rule 12.1), Insanity/Mental Illness (Rule 12.2) and Public

Authority (Rule 12.3). Upon request by the United States, the defendant shall provide such

notices within fourteen days of the request.

G. Newly Discovered Information. Each party has a continuing duty to

disclose to opposing counsel all newly discovered information or other material within the

scope of this Order.

H. Motions Relating to Trial Proceedings. Any trial-related motions (for

example, motions in limine or motions to participate in voir dire) must be made at the

appropriate time to the district court judge, the Honorable Jerry W. Blackwell

I. Discovery Motions. Prior to filing a discovery motion, counsel for the

defense and counsel for the United States must meet for a discovery conference pursuant

to L.R. 12.1. Any discovery motion must include a statement certifying that such meet-

and-confer conference took place and that the parties were unable to reach an agreement.

Motions that do not comply with the meet-and-confer requirement will be denied without

prejudice for noncompliance.

J. Expert Witnesses. The parties must disclose the identity of any expert

witness and make all expert disclosures required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure

CASE 0:25-cr-00349-JWB-JFD Doc. 58 Filed 02/09/26 Page 5 of 8

16 no later than 28 days before trial. The parties must disclose the identity of any expert

who will testify in rebuttal of an expert witness and make all disclosures as to such expert

required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16 no later than 14 days before trial.

III. SUPPRESSION AND DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS; HEARING

The following provisions govern the filing of all pretrial suppression and dispositive

motions in this matter.

A. Deadlines for Filing Suppression and Dispositive Motions. Any

suppression or dispositive motions must be filed and served consistent with Federal Rules

of Criminal Procedure 12(b) and 47 on or before May 4, 2026. D. Minn. LR 12.1(c)(1).

All responses to motions must be filed by May 18, 2026. D. Minn. LR 12.1(c)(2).

Any motion for extension of time to file suppression and other dispositive motions

shall be filed on or before May 4, 2026. The motion shall contain facts supporting a request

that, under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A), the time from the date of the extension request

through the date of the filing of any dispositive motion, shall be excluded from the

calculation of the time within which this case must be brought to trial. The motion shall

state whether denial of the requested extension would deprive defense counsel of the time

necessary to properly evaluate and prepare pretrial motions, taking into account the

exercise of due diligence such that the ends of justice served by the extension request

outweigh the interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. §

3161(h)(7)(A) (even if a criminal case has not been designated as complex, an extension

should be granted when refusing to grant the extension would leave counsel for the defense

CASE 0:25-cr-00349-JWB-JFD Doc. 58 Filed 02/09/26 Page 6 of 8

with “insufficient time for effective representation, taking into account the exercise of due

diligence.”).

If there is no need for a motions hearing, either because no motions were filed,

or for any other reason, both counsel must electronically file a letter saying so on or

before May 4, 2026 or immediately upon the occurrence of the event making a

motions hearing unnecessary if that event occurs after May 4, 2026.

B. Suppression Motions and Supporting Briefing.

A suppression motion must be sufficiently detailed to enable opposing counsel and

the Court to identify the specific evidence that is subject to the challenge and the nature of

that challenge. All motions to suppress must identify with specificity the item(s) of

evidence and/or the statements that the moving party seeks to suppress. The motion to

suppress must give the prosecution notice of what contentions they must be prepared to

meet at a motions hearing, if one is held.

C. Meet-and-Confer Prior to Filing Suppression and Dispositive Motions.

Prior to filing a suppression motion, the parties must meet and confer in a good faith

and attempt to narrow the issues presented by the motion, pursuant to L.R. 12.1. The parties

will attempt to agree on whether an evidentiary hearing is necessary, and if so, what

witnesses and evidence will be presented. The meet-and-confer process must be conducted

either in person or by telephone and will not be satisfied by email communications alone.

CASE 0:25-cr-00349-JWB-JFD Doc. 58 Filed 02/09/26 Page 7 of 8

D. Motions Hearing Procedures.

The parties must file any Notice of Intent to Call Witnesses by May 18, 2026. Any

Responsive Notice of Intent to Call Witnesses must be filed by May 21, 2026. The notice

must include information sufficient to identify all witnesses, as well as estimated amount

of time for each witness’s expected testimony. To avoid the need for a recess of the motions

hearing, the United States is requested to make all disclosures required by Fed. R. Crim. P.

26.2 and 12(h) at least three days prior to the hearing.

The Court may schedule an evidentiary hearing based on the pleadings. Nothing in

this Order shall preclude the Court from setting oral argument on any motion to assist the

Court in administering justice or if requested by either party in its motion, objection, or

response pleadings.

E. Sanctions for Non-Compliance.

The Court will review all motions to suppress evidence for completeness and

specificity when they are filed. Motions that do not comply with this Order, including by

not specifically identifying the evidence being challenged and stating the nature of the

challenge, may be recommended for dismissal. The district court may deny a motion with

prejudice after repeated violations of this requirement.

F. Motion Hearing.

In the event a motions hearing is required, it will be held on May 22, 2026 at 1:00

PM in Courtroom 6A, 316 Robert St. N., Saint Paul, MN 55101 before the undersigned.

CASE 0:25-cr-00349-JWB-JFD Doc. 58 Filed 02/09/26 Page 8 of 8

G. Trial Date.

Because setting a trial date is a matter for the district judge, the parties are directed

to contact the chambers of the Honorable Jerry W. Blackwell for trial and trial-related

dates.

H. Speedy Trial.

The period from February 12, 2026 through the motions filing date of May 4,

2026 shall be excluded from the Speedy Trial Act computations in this case. The Court

finds, based on the entire record of this complex case, that the ends of justice served by

granting the requested extension in this complex case outweigh the best interest of the

public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(7)(A).

Dated: February 9, 2026 s/ John F. Docherty
JOHN F. DOCHERTY
United States Magistrate Judge

File and source

File: gov.uscourts.mnd.227852.58.0.pdf
Size: 213,312 bytes
SHA-256: 5314627f2406094e085393034189f3b943e7c4d4ce3e59db97ff3b64c66e2e90
Our copy: gov.uscourts.mnd.227852.58.0.pdf
Original: archive.org