LINDA R. READE, Chief District Judge.
This matter appears before the court on Trista Marie Espinoza's motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (civil docket no. 1) and supplement (civil docket no. 2). Trista Marie Espinoza ("the movant") filed the former motion on April 5, 2013 and the latter motion on September 5, 2013.
Having conducted its preliminary consideration of the movant's § 2255 motion and supplement pursuant to Rule 4(b) of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings, the court directs the government and the movant to respond in the following manner:
1. The government is directed to file a brief in response to the movant's § 2255 motion and supplement on or before December 9, 2013. The government may attach relevant exhibits to its brief.
2. If she so chooses, the movant is directed to file a brief in reply to the government's response on or before January 3, 2013.
The movant raises at least one claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel waives the attorney-client privilege as to communications with the attorney that are necessary to prove or disprove the claim. See Tasby v. United States, 504 F.2d 332, 336 (8th Cir. 1974) ("When a client calls into public question the competence of his attorney, the privilege is waived."); see also United States v. Pinson, 584 F.3d 972, 978 (10th Cir. 2009) (citing Tasby, 504 F.2d at 336); United States v. Davis, 583 F.3d 1081, 1090 (8th Cir. 2009) (making clear that attorney-client privilege cannot be used as both a sword and a shield); In re Lott, 424 F.3d 446, 453 (6th Cir. 2005) (citing Tasby, 504 F.2d at 336); Bittaker v. Woodford, 331 F.3d 715, 720 (9th Cir. 2003) (addressing scope of waiver); United States v. Ballard, 779 F.2d 287, 292 (5th Cir. 1986) (permitting an attorney to reveal otherwise privileged communications when defending himself against charges of improper conduct); Schwimmer v. United States, 232 F.2d 855, 863 (8th Cir. 1956) (indicating that waiver may be express or implied). Therefore, counsel whose representation is challenged is directed to file with the court an affidavit that responds only to the movant's specific allegation(s) of ineffective assistance of counsel. Such affidavit must contain all of the information that counsel reasonably believes is necessary to respond to the movant's specific allegation(s). In addition, counsel is directed to attach to, or include with, his or her affidavit all of the documents that he or she reasonably believes are necessary to respond to the movant's allegation(s). This court-supervised response to the movant's allegation(s) must be filed with the court on or before November 8, 2013. The clerk's office is directed to provide a copy of this order to the movant's former counsel. After defense counsel complies with the court's directives, the clerk's office is directed to serve both parties with a copy of the documents that defense counsel files.
Where former counsel cooperates by reviewing his or her files, by providing information and documents, by preparing an affidavit and/or by testifying during an evidentiary hearing, the court deems it appropriate to pay him or her under the Criminal Justice Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3006A. After providing the requisite services, counsel may submit a supplemental CJA 20 voucher. Absent exceptional circumstances or an extraordinary reason for doing ...