Case: 1:09-cr-00059 Document #: 147 Filed: 05/19/20 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:2100
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
`
`United States of America,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`Frank A. Castaldi,
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`Case No.: 09-cr-59
`
`Hon. Robert W. Gettleman
`
`
`
`
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`
`
`DEFENDANT’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF RENEWED MOTION TO REDUCE PRISON
`TERM PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i)
`
`The government agrees that Frank Castaldi “has presented an extraordinary and compelling
`
`reason allowing compassionate release,” D.E. 146 at 3, and does not oppose his motion to reduce
`
`the sentence to time served. Castaldi has no objection to the government’s sole proposed condition
`
`for such relief: a term of probation or supervised release, with a condition of home confinement,
`
`that does not exceed the unserved portion of the original prison term. The government does not
`
`recommend a length for such a term. Castaldi proposes three years of supervised release, with
`
`home confinement as a condition, but he would not object if the Court deems a longer term
`
`necessary to account for the factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).
`
`Castaldi further wishes to update the Court on developments since he filed the Motion,
`
`including those relevant to carrying out the requested relief. The government’s Response (D.E.
`
`146 at 2) correctly notes that FCI Elkton’s Warden received Castaldi’s request for either
`
`compassionate release or home confinement no later than April 10, 2020. But in Wilson v.
`
`Williams, 20-cv-794, the class action lawsuit pending in the Northern District of Ohio, the Bureau
`
`of Prisons (“BOP”) claimed on May 11 that it does not have a compassionate release request from
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case: 1:09-cr-00059 Document #: 147 Filed: 05/19/20 Page 2 of 4 PageID #:2101
`
`Castaldi. And in denying him home confinement the BOP referenced the fact that Castaldi is about
`
`four months shy of serving 50% of the term imposed.1 In the week since Castaldi filed his renewed
`
`Motion, the total number of cases of infection at FCI Elkton, as reported on the BOP website, has
`
`grown another 12.5%—from 199 to 250. D.E. 141-6; https://www.bop.gov/coronavirus/.
`
`Castaldi’s risk of contracting COVID-19 and becoming seriously ill or dying in the next few days
`
`or weeks is a sound reason to grant the Motion promptly, rather than wait a number of months for
`
`the mere possibility of administrative relief.
`
`Finally, if the Court grants the Motion, it should allow Castaldi to quarantine at home rather
`
`than at FCI Elkton. Other courts have chosen this path based on the greater health risk from being
`
`in quarantine with other potentially infected inmates and BOP staff who enter quarantined areas.
`
`See United States v. Scparta, 2020 WL 1910481 at *7 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 20, 2020) (noting that the
`
`BOP quarantine policy “achieves the backward result of prolonging incarceration and increasing
`
`community spread, all of which runs directly counter to Congress's express purpose”); United
`
`States v. Resnick, 2020 WL 1651508, at *7-8 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 2, 2020) (quarantine at home would
`
`be “significantly better” than at the defendant’s facility); see also D.E. 141-17 at ¶ 43 (ACLU
`
`complaint alleging that Elkton’s quarantine unit mixes symptomatic inmates with those awaiting
`
`release). In a recent case involving another Elkton inmate, United States v. Coles, 2020 WL
`
`1976296, at *8 (C.D. Ill. Apr. 24, 2020), the court ordered release within 24 hours, followed by a
`
`
` 1 The government included this information from the BOP in two excel files that it produced to
`comply with a court order in Wilson. The government designated the files “attorneys eyes
`only,” pursuant to a protective order. The court in Wilson granted Castaldi’s request to use the
`information from these excel files in the Motion pending before this Court. Wilson, D.E. 82
`(margin order dated May 18, 2020). The undersigned counsel has shared the relevant
`information from those files with government counsel in the case before this Court. The two
`added pieces of information the BOP included for its home confinement denial—apart from
`correctly noting that Castaldi has served 48% of his prison term—were both incorrect.
`
`

`

`Case: 1:09-cr-00059 Document #: 147 Filed: 05/19/20 Page 3 of 4 PageID #:2102
`
`requirement to self-quarantine for 14 days. The Court should order the same here because Castaldi
`
`will be able to live on a separate floor of his house, with a separate bedroom and bathroom, while
`
`he quarantines.
`
` Castaldi stands ready to answer any questions from the Court or provide any further
`
`information that the Court may need in order for it to grant the requested relief promptly.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`__s/ David Debold_____________
`David Debold (admitted pro hac vice)
` ddebold@gibsondunn.com
`Daniel W. Nelson
`dnelson@gibsondunn.com
`Matthew G. Aiken (admitted pro hac vice)
` maiken@gibsondunn.com
`Sam Mancina (admitted pro hac vice)
` smancina@gibsondunn.com
`GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
`1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
`
`Washington, D.C. 20036-5306
`Telephone: (202) 955-8551
`Facsimile: (202) 530-9682
`
`
`
`Attorneys for Defendant Frank A. Castaldi
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: May 19, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case: 1:09-cr-00059 Document #: 147 Filed: 05/19/20 Page 4 of 4 PageID #:2103
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on May 19, 2020, I electronically transmitted the attached document
`
`to the Clerk of the Court using the ECF System for filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic
`Filing.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`__s/ David Debold____________
`David Debold
`
`