CINDY A. COHN, ESQ.; SBN 145997 McGLASHAN & SARRAIL Professional Corporation 177 Bovet Road, Sixth Floor San Mateo, CA 94402 Tel: (415) 341-2585 Fax: (415) 341-1395 LEE TIEN, ESQ.; SBN 148216 1452 Curtis Street Berkeley, CA 94702 Tel: (510) 525-0817 ROBERT CORN-REVERE, ESQ. JEREMEY B. MILLER, ESQ. JULIA F. KOGAN, ESQ. Hogan & Hartson, L.L.P. 555 Thirteenth Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20008 Tel: (202) 637-5000 Attorneys for Plaintiff Daniel J. Bernstein IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DANIEL J. BERNSTEIN ) ) C 95-00582 MHP Plaintiff, ) ) ) PROPOSED ORDER ) GRANTING PRELIMINARY ) INJUNCTION UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ) STATE et al., ) Date: November 8, 1996 ) Time: 10:30 a.m. Defendants. ) Judge: Hon. Marilyn Hall Patel ) ________________________________________) Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction in this matter came on for regular hearing in the above-entitled Court on November 8, 1996. Cindy A. Cohn of McGlashan & Sarrail, Professional Corporation appeared for Plaintiff and Anthony J. Coppolino of the United States Department of Justice appeared for Defendants. Having considered the pleadings and evidence submitted herein, the applicable law and argument presented by counsel at hearing, this Court hereby ORDERS as follows: 1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction is GRANTED. 2. Defendants are ENJOINED from investigating or prosecuting under the Arms Export Control Act (“AECA”) 22 U.S.C. § 2778 et seq., and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (“ITAR”), 22 C.F.R. § 120 et seq., or any export control statute or regulation which would require prepublication licensing of any teaching or scientific exchange activities, the following persons: a. Plaintiff, and b. Plaintiff’s students, and c. Any person who receives technical data, cryptography software or defense services from Plaintiff or his students;when such technical data, cryptography software or defense services were given or received as part of teaching or scientific exchanges during or in preparation for the cryptography course to be taught by Plaintiff during the Spring, 1997 semester at the University of Illinois at Chicago. 3. Defendants are further ENJOINED from requiring licensure, approval, registration, reporting or the fulfillment of any requirements of the AECA, ITAR or any export control statute or regulation which would require prepublication licensing of any teaching or scientific exchange activities, the following persons: a. Plaintiff, and b. Plaintiff’s students, and c. Any person who receives technical data, cryptography software or defense services from Plaintiff or his students; when such technical data, cryptography software or defense services were given or received as part of teaching or scientific exchanges during or in preparation for the cryptography course to be taught by Plaintiff during the Spring, 1997 semester at the University of Illinois at Chicago. 4. Notwithstanding any provision of the AECA, ITAR, or any other export control statute or regulation, should Defendants breach this Stipulation, any person affected by such breach shall have immediate access to this Court for review on an expedited basis. 5. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(c), Plaintiff need not post a bond for this injunction. See California ex rel. Van De Kamp v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, 766 F. 2d 1319, 1325-26 (9th Cir. 1985), modified, 775 F.2d 998 (9th Cir. 1985) (no bond required where considerations of public policy make a waiver of a bond appropriate). Dated: Hon. Marilyn Hall Patel United States District Judge