I am posting the new Joint status report in the Fairholme lawsuit. Contrary to what Fairholme said on 9/22/14 both parties feel that a status conference is not necessary.Remember that on 9/22/14 Fairholme stated : In accordance with this Court’s Order of August 13, 2014 (Doc. 85), the parties hereby notify the Court that they do not request a status conference on September 24. However, Plaintiffs are of the view that a status conference may soon be necessary to address Plaintiffs’ concerns regarding the pace of document discovery. This leaves two possibilities, one the government has suddenly decided to cooperate and Fairholme is no longer concerned with the pace discovery. The other possibility is that discussions are underway to negotiate a settlement. Bruce Berkowitz did make a confident claim in his interview Friday night when referring to this effect when he said:”we are discussing it.” To be fair, that was a vague reference and could mean a number of things. I wish I could, but I can not offer any more commentary on this.
Just as the post on 9/22/14 was written and rewritten several times the same hold true for my post today. I am being forced to contemplate many things.
Folks I have to say that now more than ever I wish I could share more with you. I am obligated to respect the wishes of those who reach out to me first and foremost. I was taught at a young age that a man is only as good as his word. It has been a long struggle, and we have been attacked by all sides yet we have not surrendered even when it seemed our fight was hopeless. The last few months have been especially hard. I just want to remind everyone involved that it is always darkest before the dawn. There will be a day when you will fully understand what I am saying, until then please, Keep the Faith!

Fairholme 9/26/14
In accordance with this Court’s Orders of August 13, 2014 (Doc. 85) and September 22,
2014 (Doc. 98), the parties hereby notify the Court that, unless the Court would like oral argument
concerning the pending application of J. Timothy Howard for access to protected information
(Doc. 93), they do not believe it is necessary to hold a status conference during the week
of September 29. Should the Court decide to hold a status conference, the parties propose that
the conference be held at 2 p.m. on Wednesday, October 1. In that event, the parties will
promptly provide the names of attorneys who plan to participate in or listen to the status conference.”