Case 1:14-cv-09763-VM Document 44 Filed 08/28/15 Page 8 of 35 {S.D.N.Y.). Okt. No. 227 ("April 15, 2014 Stip. and Order Mod. J.").) Shortly filed the thereafter, Complaint Merrill filed allowed NSL his against recipients 9, 18 11, 2014, the Government. instant requirements annually.• Mar. December on Section action, u.s.c. § the time 3511 {b) (3) non-disclosure challenge to At Merrill 3Sll{b) (3) (in effect 2006 - June 1, 2015). As such, Merrill's Complaint proceeds as a separate action from Q9-~. !. and its progeny. At issue in this litigation is whether the Government can continue to prohibit disclosure of the redacted Attachment under Sections 2907 and 3511 (as amended on June 2, the 2015). Merrill asserts three causes of action: non-disclosure Attachment is a speech" order discussion order is the First Amendment; not justified under because the Government cannot establish a believe that of the Hpermanent or effectively permanent ban on prohibited by nondisclosure prohibiting (1) that disclosure may result (2) that Section the 3511 "good reason• to in an enumerated harm related to an authorized investigation to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence • Ae amended, Section 3511 no longer requires an NSL recipient who uneuccessfully challenged a nondisclosure requirement to wait a year or more before again seeking judicial relief. (~ Gov't Reply Mem. J.) - a -