Search Full Text

… Order granting enlargement of time for [redacted] to file a petition challenging [redacted] protection order. … Order Granting Enlargement of Time, In re Application of the Federal Bureau of Investigation for an Order …

… Order unsealing orders and opinions for various dockets for the limited purpose set forth in government's [redacted] motion. … Order, In re Application of the Federal Bureau of Investigation for an Order Requiring the …

… Primary order granting application pursuant to 50 U.S.C. § 1861 of call detail records or "telephony metadata" created by [redacted]. … Primary Order, In re Application of the Federal Bureau of Investigation for an Order …

… Motion to Unseal Records, In re Application of the Federal Bureau of Investigation for an Order Requiring the Prod. of Tangible Things from [REDACTED], No. BR 09-19 (FISA Ct. Jan. 7, 2010). … Approved for public release …

… Joint Motion for Enlargement of Time, In re Application of the Federal Bureau of Investigation for an Order Requiring the Prod. of Tangible Things from [REDACTED], No. BR 09-19 (FISA Ct. Jan. 8, 2010). … Approved for …

… Motion for Amended Secondary Order, In re Application of the Federal Bureau of Investigation for an Order Requiring the Prod. of Tangible Things from [REDACTED], No. BR 09-19 (FISA Ct. Jan. 11, 2010). … Approved for public …

… Denying defendants’ “motions to suppress the FISA interceptions.” 861 F. Supp. at 253. View document: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=958433614015386942&q=861+F… … United States v. Rahman, 861 F. Supp. 247 …

… Denying defendant’s “motion to compel disclosure of any ongoing surveillance pursuant to Title III or FISA is denied.” 2002 WL 1836755, at *7. … United States v. Abdel Sattar, No. 02 Cr. 395(JGK), 2002 WL 1836755 (S.D.N.Y. …

… Denying “[a]ll of the defendant’s motions to suppress the fruits of the FISA evidence” 2003 WL 22137012 at *22. Finding that “the FISA surveillance was lawfully authorized and executed.” Id. … United States v. Abdel …

… Denying defendant’s motion for evidentiary hearing “on both ‘government noncompliance with discovery obligations, principally concerning electronic surveillance evidence,’ and the ‘admissibility of electronic surveillance …