◆ SpookStack

va soa ' ey ” . BE GY Deters etn bh) a +, 4 r pth GIA CPR 641 CPR) 101-41 @ . a . ; 4 To ee * hd Com. deya? Bureau of Investigation a >~ = ash L. Thornburgh . od oe Sh . pumyecr: Ent ly Harris, et al. v. Charles W. Bates, et al. ; bors, «. received from any source, used, or disclosed any 3 FED S 176: Dep. AD - Dep. AD At “t- “| Anat. Dies Adaln, em Syst. —, ° 4. Affatrs UNITED STATES VERNMENT M emorandum : Director | . =, DATE: Februa Assigtant. Attorney General ‘bo Wi tt {2 Criminal Division "ae . Cal.) No. CY 760034 ALS “The Summons and Complaint in the subject civil action were filed -m the United States District Court for the Central District of California January 5, 1976, and were first served on‘theUnited States Attorney — - for the Eastern District of California Janyary 9;;, 1976. Copies of the Sunmons and Complaint are enclosed he th 2 ; In order that we might respond to the al¥egations contained ‘tn the - Complaint, it is requested that, as to the allegations applicable to . Bureau defendants, you advise which of the allegations should be admitted o> and which should be dented, and that you suggest any affirmative allega- ~:;::. tions or defenses that may "be appropriate. Please include in your. reply a the manner and date of service as to each Bureau defendant. We would nee 2 ye of course, appreciate your’ Comnents and suggestions with respect to the “3°95 legal issues involved in the ca & and any discovery that you believe . ey 2 would be appropriate to initi oe fs Additionally, with-regard to particular allegations contained in the . mir Complaint, please note that plaintiffs have alleged interception by -W* Si3'% electronic surveillance [Comp. at para. 65(d)]. ‘As to this allegation,~ ..: Ly, ". please advise whether your agency, or anyone else on behalf of your agency. Z s has at any time up to January 5, 1976 oa ; A alae = Me: a-™ mn rhe we a ed, conducted, or procured electronic ) ai e of any of the plaintiffs, JED 00 7549) | b. ‘ rcepted:or monitored any BEC Ht on to which “+t any pigintiff was a party; cnevmmee eaten ware conversation of plaintiffs obtained by means of electronic surveil lance; or — - 4 a a otherwise been fnvolved in any electronic survef}ance Ce a , Of plaintiffs, their conversations, or any premises kfiown Say te | } to be owned, leased, or licensed by them, including such @-eset "| oe. whera Gre of the parties may have consented oy ae GUE IY go PS "Bey US. Seviegs Bends Rgalrly n th Parr § pe Pl go Pe. of Chee Ot ANA ely MEhf- PLAS ¢ BER Fe a Orr