Jamil El-Banna, v. Robert M. Gates, Petitioner Respondent.

No. 07-1109.United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
Filed On: August 10, 2007.

[EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

BEFORE: Sentelle and Brown, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam.

ORDER
Upon consideration of the motions, the oppositions thereto, and the reply, it is.

ORDERED that the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis be granted. It is.

FURTHER ORDERED the motion for production of the Government Information, Government Evidence, exculpatory evidence, and any audiotapes of the Combatant Status Review Tribunal Proceedings be granted, consistent with this court’s opinion and protective order inBismullah v. Gates, No. 06-1197, 2007 WL 2067938 (D.C. Cir. Jul. 20, 2007) (opinion); 2007 WL 2207923 (D.C. Cir. Jul. 30, 2007) (protective order). It is.

FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for entry of the district court protective order be denied and that the protective order entered by this court in Bismullah, 2007 WL 2207923, including any subsequent modifications, be entered in this case pending further order of the court. It is.

FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for summary reversal be denied. The merits of the parties’ positions are not so clear as to warrant summary action. See Cascade Broadcasting Group, Ltc. v. FCC, 822 F.2d 1172, 1174
(D.C. Cir. 1987) (per curiam). It is.

FURTHER ORDERED, with respect to the motion for petitioners’ personal access to the Government Information, Government Evidence, exculpatory evidence, and any audiotapes of the Combatant Status Review Tribunal Proceedings, as well as the motion for production of evidence the district court ordered preserved, that the

Page 2

parties resolve the matters implicated by these motions in accordance with the court’s opinion and protective order in Bismullah. To the extent they are unable to do so, the parties should address the matters in their briefs on the merits. It is.

FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for release be referred to the merits panel to which this petition for review is assigned. The parties are directed to address in their briefs the issues presented in the motion for release rather than incorporate those arguments by reference.

The Clerk is directed to establish a briefing schedule.

Page 1