Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Source documents Order on Excludable Time (Sniders Jean-Jacques and Tanya Pierre) — United States v. Sniders Jean-Jacques et al. (Dkt. 36)

Order on Excludable Time (Sniders Jean-Jacques and Tanya Pierre) — United States v. Sniders Jean-Jacques et al. (Dkt. 36)

Summary

Document 36 is an Order on Excludable Time dated February 26, 2026, in United States v. Sniders Jean-Jacques and Tanya Pierre, Criminal No. 26-10031-RGS, U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Magistrate Judge Boal states that the defendants have elected to proceed under the Automatic Discovery Rules and that the interests of justice outweigh the best interests of the public and defendants for a trial within seventy days of the initial appearance. The order directs the Clerk to enter excludable time for the period February 26, 2026, the date of the defendants' initial appearance, up to and including March 31, 2026, the date of the initial status conference. It cites 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and Local Rule 112.2(a)(1).

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

Cite this document

“Order on Excludable Time (Sniders Jean-Jacques and Tanya Pierre) — United States v. Sniders Jean-Jacques et al. (Dkt. 36).” Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/gov-uscourts-mad-295484-36-0-4c5854be49/, SHA-256 d84fd19e9499be2fda035e50cad8015b65e1190b39ffe1d496324460e9e72d51.

Full text

       Case 1:26-cr-10031-RGS            Document 36        Filed 02/26/26      Page 1 of 2




                             UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                              DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

CRIMINAL NO. 26-10031-RGS


                                  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

                                                 v.

                       SNIDERS JEAN-JACQUES and TANYA PIERRE
                              ORDER ON EXCLUDABLE TIME

                                         February 26, 2026

Boal, M.J.

       The defendants have elected to proceed under the Automatic Discovery Rules in

accordance with Local Rules 116.1 through 116.5. The interests of justice in this case, i.e., to

provide the parties additional time to develop their respective discovery plans, to produce

discovery under the automatic discovery process, to evaluate the discovery and to seek additional

discovery, and for the defendants to consider the need for pre-trial motions, outweigh the best

interests of the public and defendants for a trial within seventy days of the date of the

defendants’ initial appearance.

       Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that, pursuant to the provisions of 18 U.S.C. §

3161(h)(7)(A) and Section 5(b)(7)(B) of the Plan for Prompt Disposition of Criminal Cases in

the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (Statement of Time Limits

Adopted by the Court and Procedures for Implementing Them, Effective December 2008) and

Local Rule 112.2(a)(1), the Clerk of this Court enter excludable time for the period February 26,
       Case 1:26-cr-10031-RGS            Document 36        Filed 02/26/26     Page 2 of 2




2026, which was the date of the defendants’ initial appearance in this district, up to and including

March 31, 2026, which is the date of the initial status conference. 1


                                               /s/ Jennifer C. Boal
                                              JENNIFER C. BOAL
                                              United States Magistrate Judge




1
  The parties are hereby advised that under the provisions of Rule 2(b) of the Rules for United
States Magistrates in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, any party
may move for reconsideration by a district judge of the determination(s) and order(s) set forth
herein within fourteen (14) days after receipt of a copy of this order, unless a different time is
prescribed by this court or the district judge. The party seeking reconsideration shall file with
the Clerk of this Court, and serve upon all parties, a written notice of the motion which shall
specifically designate the order or part thereof to be reconsidered and the basis for the objection
thereto. The district judge, upon timely motion, shall reconsider the magistrate judge's order and
set aside any portion thereof found to be clearly erroneous in fact or contrary to law. The parties
are further advised that the United States Court of Appeals for this Circuit has indicated that
failure to comply with this rule shall preclude further appellate review. See Phinney v.
Wentworth Douglas Hospital, 199 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 1999); Sunview Condo. Ass’n v. Flexel Int’l
Ltd., 116 F.3d 962 (1st Cir. 1997); Pagano v. Frank, 983 F.2d 343 (1st Cir. 1993).

File and source

File
gov.uscourts.mad.295484.36.0.pdf
Size
126,706 bytes
SHA-256
d84fd19e9499be2fda035e50cad8015b65e1190b39ffe1d496324460e9e72d51
Our copy
gov.uscourts.mad.295484.36.0.pdf
Original
No public link identified.
Back to top