Special counsel Jack Smith has made a new filing in his case so-called “election interference” case against former President Donald Trump with the D.C. Circuit Court.

In the filing before U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, Smith requested a delay in the case. In the late Thursday filing, Smith’s team emphasized that they still needed to thoroughly analyze a previous U.S. Supreme Court ruling that seemed to favor Trump.

Initially, Chutkan set a hearing for August 16, but Smith’s request puts that timeline in doubt. He proposed submitting a schedule for pretrial proceedings by the end of the month, which would push back any significant actions until September.

“Although those consultations are well underway, the Government has not finalized its position on the most appropriate schedule for the parties to brief issues related to the decision,” prosecutors wrote in the filing. “The Government therefore respectfully requests additional time to provide the Court with an informed proposal regarding the schedule for pretrial proceedings moving forward.”

The filing goes on to note that Trump’s defense team did not oppose extending the date.

The request represents a departure from Special Counsel Jack Smith’s previous strategy of expediting the case. Since the beginning, Smith’s team has focused on hastening the proceedings.

In December, Smith requested an expedited review of the presidential immunity issue from the Supreme Court. However, the justices decided not to address it before the appeals court had its opportunity.

On December 1, Chutkan denied Trump’s motion to dismiss the case based on presidential immunity. His subsequent appeal led to a significant multi-month delay in the case and the cancellation of the originally scheduled March trial date.

The Supreme Court found 6-3 last month that presidents are immune from prosecution for official acts taken in office.

“Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority,” the court held. “And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts.” The justices left it to lower courts to decide what actions Trump took constituted official and non-official actions.