Published On: Wed, Feb 24th, 2016

With 12 Other Active Cases, The FBI Can’t Claim That It’s Just About One iPhone

The FBI and a Department of Justice have used a clever account to urge their box in a brawl between a FBI and Apple. The FBI wants Apple to transparent an iPhone 5c belonging to one of a terrorists concerned in a San Bernardino shooting. According to a FBI, it’s only about one iPhone. And yet, that evidence doesn’t have too most faith given that there are now 12 other active cases involving iPhones and iPads using iOS 6 to iOS 9.

A sovereign decider in New York has asked Apple to yield a list with other active cases involving password-protected devices. The list was unblocked on Tuesday. The disproportion between these cases and a San Bernardino one is that these 12 other cases were filed in private.

Michael A. Scarcella, editor during The National Law Journal, common it on Twitter. Here it is:

Screen Shot 2016-02-23 during 8.45.43 PM

Let’s demeanour during what a Government has been observant for a past week. “The Order requires Apple to support a FBI with honour to this singular iPhone used by Farook by providing a FBI with a event to establish a passcode,” a Department of Justice wrote in a motion. While technically true, a Government has used this account that “it’s only a phone” over and over again.

During a media briefing, a White House deputy emphasized a fact that this was only about one iPhone.

And yet, Apple has had these requests for a while as we can see in today’s list. The association objected to these All Writs Act orders in sequence to see if a Department of Justice would follow adult with other arguments. According to a WSJ, these cases are stalling since of a stream open dispute between a FBI and Apple.

In a San Bernardino, it’s value observant that Apple primarily asked a FBI to record a ask per in private. But now it’s transparent a FBI wanted to use this event to make this a open discuss to force Apple’s hand.

The FBI and a Department of Justice have been perplexing to spin a story in their favor, leveraging a militant conflict to make Apple approve with a privacy-invading request.

Apple’s filing came with a following minute from an Apple lawyer:

Dear Judge Orenstein:

I write in response to this Court’s Feb 16, 2016 sequence (the “Order”) requesting that Apple yield certain additional sum per other requests it has perceived during a pendency of this matter that are of a identical inlet to a one during emanate in a present case.

As recently as yesterday, Apple was served with an sequence by a United States Attorney’s Office for a Central District of California. (See Exhibit A.) The supervision performed that sequence on a basement of an ex parte focus pursuant to a All Writs Act (see Exhibit B), per that Apple had no before event to be listened (despite carrying privately requested from a supervision in allege a event to do so). The trustworthy sequence leads Apple to perform even some-more fatiguing and concerned engineering than that sought in a box now before this Court— i.e., to emanate and bucket Apple-signed program onto a theme iPhone device to by-pass a confidence and anti-tampering facilities of a device in sequence to capacitate a supervision to penetrate a passcode to obtain entrance to a stable information contained therein. (See Exhibit A.) As invited by a California court’s order, Apple intends to soon find relief. But, as this new box creates apparent, a emanate stays utterly pressing.

In further to a aforementioned order, Apple has perceived other All Writs Act orders during a pendency of this case, certain sum of that are set onward in a list below. In particular, for any such ask Apple provides a following categories of information requested in a Order:


With honour to a other categories of information sought in a Order (specifically, categories 4-6), Apple responds that following a conflict or other response to any ask there has not been any final showing thereof to Apple’s knowledge, and Apple has not concluded to perform any services on a inclination to that those requests are directed.

Apple vs FBI

Featured Image: swatchandsoda/Shutterstock (IMAGE HAS BEEN MODIFIED)

About the Author

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these html tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>