Cincinnati Enquirer v. DOJ (S.D. Ohio) -- determining that: (1) DEA performed adequate search for records organized under “Operation Speakeasy”; and (2) DEA could not rely on Exemption 7(C) to categorically withhold investigatory records pertaining to third party, because privacy interest interest was outweighed by public interest—namely shedding light on DOJ’s decision not to prosecute the highest elected law enforcement official in a Kentucky county for obstruction of justice.

Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Wash. v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- ruling that: (1) agency’s denial of plaintiff’s request for expedite processing was moot issue; and (2) DOJ properly relied on Exemption 5’s deliberative process privilege to withhold draft legal analysis prepared by an OLC attorney concerning Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation; and (3) DOJ failed to show that OLC’s signed memorandum to Attorney General Barr was pre-decisional for purposes of Exemption 5’s deliberative process privilege or that it was protected under the attorney-client privilege, noting that DOJ affidavits were “so inconsistent with evidence in the record, they are not worthy of credence.”

Besson v. U.S. Dep’t of Commerce (D.D.C.) -- on renewed summary judgment and following supplemental release of material, concluding that government properly relied on Exemption 4 to withhold remaining disputed portion of agreement between NIH and a private telecommunications company.

Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.