Court filing
Order - Us V Bock Feeding Our Future
Summary
The Fourth Amended Arraignment Notice & Case Management Order entered February 14, 2024 by United States Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung in United States v. Aimee Marie Bock et al., Case No. 22-cr-223 (NEB/TNL), in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, as Doc. 254. The order grants the government's unopposed motion for more time to respond to pretrial motions, ECF No. 249, and finds under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h) that the ends of justice support a continuance. It sets responses to motions and notices of intent to call witnesses for February 20, 2024, responsive notices for February 27, 2024, and an arraignment and any motions hearing for March 11, 2024. It states that the trial date will be set by District Judge Nancy E. Brasel and excludes time through February 20, 2024 from Speedy Trial Act computations.
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
No. 0:22-cr-00223-NEB-DTS · Doc. 254 · Docket on CourtListener
Full text
CASE 0:22-cr-00223-NEB-DTS Doc. 254 Filed 02/14/24 Page 1 of 5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
United States of America, Case No. 22-cr-223 (NEB/TNL)
Plaintiff,
FOURTH AMENDED
v. ARRAIGNMENT NOTICE &
CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER
Aimee Marie Bock et al.,
Defendants.
Counsel for all parties are instructed to review this Order carefully and in its
entirety as it represents a significant deviation from the schedules that ordinarily
govern criminal cases in the District of Minnesota.
***
This matter comes before the Court on the Government’s Motion for Extension of
Time to Respond to Defendants’ Pretrial Motions, ECF No. 249. This matter was
previously designated complex under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii). See generally ECF
No. 95.
The Government seeks a second extension of time to respond to the pretrial motions
filed in this matter. See ECF Nos. 239, 243. The Government states that it “has been
working on its responses to the motions, but given the sheer number of motions and the
additional case[-]related obligations of members of the prosecution team,” additional time
1
CASE 0:22-cr-00223-NEB-DTS Doc. 254 Filed 02/14/24 Page 2 of 5
is needed. ECF No. 249 at 2. The Government requests that the deadline to respond be
extended to February 19, 2024. 1
In the Court’s Third Amended Arraignment Notice & Case Management Order, the
Court stated that “any response to . . . a request [to modify the schedule] shall be filed
within three days.” ECF No. 243 at 5. No responses have been received. Cf. ECF No.
249 at 4. Accordingly, the Government’s motion is unopposed.
Bearing in mind the complexity of this case, the number of pretrial motions, and the
absence of any objection to the Government’s requested extension as well as there being
no suggestion of a lack of diligent preparation by the Government, the Court finds pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h) that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance outweigh
the best interests of the public and Defendants in a speedy trial and such continuance is
necessary to provide the parties and their counsel reasonable time necessary for effective
preparation and to make efficient use of the parties’ resources.
Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The Government’s Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Defendants’
Pretrial Motions, ECF No. 249, is GRANTED.
2. As to Defendants Salim Ahmed Said, Abdihakim Ali Ahmed, Abdikadir
Ainanshe Mohamud, Ahmed Abdullahi Ghedi, and Abdirahman Mohamud Ahmed, an
arraignment hearing will be held before the undersigned on March 11, 2024, at 10:00
1
The Court notes that February 19 is the President’s Day holiday.
2
CASE 0:22-cr-00223-NEB-DTS Doc. 254 Filed 02/14/24 Page 3 of 5
a.m., in Courtroom 9W, Diana E. Murphy United States Courthouse, 300 South Fourth
Street, MINNEAPOLIS, Minnesota.
4. All responses to motions must be filed by February 20, 2024. 2 See D. Minn.
LR 12.1(c)(2). Pursuant to the Court’s prior text order, “any response to motions 188,
189, 193, 198, 205, 213, 222, and 200 as it relates to 188 shall be filed separately from
the response to the other pretrial motions.” ECF No. 232.
5. Any Notice of Intent to Call Witnesses must be filed by February 20, 2024.
See D. Minn. LR. 12.1(c)(3)(A).
6. Any Responsive Notice of Intent to Call Witnesses must be filed by
February 27, 2024. See D. Minn. LR 12.1(c)(3)(B).
7. A motions hearing will be held pursuant to Federal Rules of Criminal
Procedure 12(c) where:
a. The Government makes timely disclosures and a defendant identifies
in the motions particularized matters for which an evidentiary hearing
is necessary; or
b. Oral argument is requested by either party in its motion, objection or
response pleadings.
8. If required, the motions hearing must be heard before Magistrate Judge Tony
N. Leung on March 11, 2024, at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom 9W, Diana E. Murphy United
States Courthouse, 300 South Fourth Street, MINNEAPOLIS, Minnesota. 3 See D. Minn.
2
See supra n.1.
3
Defendants Abdinasir Mahamed Abshir, Asad Mohamed Abshir, and Hamdi Hussein Omar remain excused from
the motions hearing. ECF Nos. 179, 250, 251.
3
CASE 0:22-cr-00223-NEB-DTS Doc. 254 Filed 02/14/24 Page 4 of 5
LR 12.1(d). The parties shall be prepared to continue the hearing into March 12,
2024, if necessary.
9. TRIAL: The trial date, and other related dates, including but not limited
to motions for counsel to participate in voir dire, will be set by District Judge Nancy
E. Brasel. Counsel must contact the Courtroom Deputy for Judge Brasel to confirm
the trial date following the ruling on any pretrial motions.
10. The period of time from the date of this Order through February 20, 2024,
shall be excluded from Speedy Trial Act computations in this case. See United States v.
Mallett, 751 F.3d 907, 911 (8th Cir. 2014) (“Exclusions of time attributable to one
defendant apply to all codefendants.” (quotation omitted)); United States v. Arrellano-
Garcia, 471 F.3d 897, 900 (8th Cir. 2006) (same).
11. Should a party request modification of this schedule, any response to
such a request shall be filed within three days.
12. All prior consistent orders relating to the Indictment remain in full force and
effect.
[Continued on next page.]
4
CASE 0:22-cr-00223-NEB-DTS Doc. 254 Filed 02/14/24 Page 5 of 5
13. Failure to comply with any provision of this Order or any other prior
consistent Order shall subject the non-complying party, non-complying counsel and/or the
party such counsel represents to any and all appropriate remedies, sanctions and the like.
Date: February 14 , 2024 s/ Tony N. Leung
Tony N. Leung
United States Magistrate Judge
District of Minnesota
United States v. Bock et al.
Case No. 22-cr-223 (NEB/TNL)
5
File and source
- File
- CASE_MND_0-22-cr-00223_US-v-Bock-FeedingOurFuture_doc254_CASE-MGMT-ORDER_2024-02-14.pdf
- Size
- 254,610 bytes
- SHA-256
- 4e73cfb3ba2b0c6585b602681d68bc1de2834d5536e637823b18b4bb517bebd7
- Original
- www.govinfo.gov