TC Co. v. U.S. Forest Serv. (D.N.M.) -- concluding that: (1) plaintiff’s FOIA requests filed after the instant litigation commenced were not properly before the court; (2) agency properly relied on Exemptions 6 and 7(C) to withhold personally identifiable information about employees and third parties; (3) agency conducted adequate search for various records concerning a 2022 wildfire.
Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2024 are available here. Earlier opinions are available here.
Battle Born Investments v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- holding that DOJ properly invoked Exemption 7(C) to redact the name of an individual who stole more than 70,000 Bitcoins from Silk Road, an online black market; reasoning that third party had “strong,” categorical privacy interest in keeping secret his or her involvement in law enforcement action, whereas plaintiff’s “serious corruption claims against the government” amounted to “little more than conclusory allegations and speculation.”
Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2024 are available here. Earlier opinions are available here.
Magassa v. FBI (D.C. Cir.) (unpublished) -- affirming district court’s decision that FBI performed adequate search for records concerning plaintiff; FBI properly withheld records pursuant to Exemptions 3 (National Security Act), 7(C), and 7(E); and FBI properly refused to confirm or deny existence of plaintiff’s name on agency terrorism watchlists pursuant to Exemption 7(E).
Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2024 are available here. Earlier opinions are available here.
S. Envtl. Law Ctr. v. Tenn. Valley Auth. (E.D. Tenn.) -- denying government’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because plaintiff filed suit before agency issued its untimely determination and issues about the agency’s search and withholdings remained unresolved.
Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2024 are available here. Earlier opinions are available here.
Sabra v. U.S. Customs & Border Prot. (D.C. Cir.) (unpublished) -- affirming district court’s decision that agency’s production of records mooted plaintiff’s expedited processing claim and that agency’s search for records was adequate.
Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2024 are available here. Earlier opinions are available here.
Dec. 18, 2024
Leopold v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- in dispute over the Attorney General’s communications referencing voting irregularities in the 2020 election, deciding that DOJ properly withheld all but one document pursuant to Exemption 5’s deliberative process privilege and/or Exemption 7(E); rejecting DOJ’s argument that Exemption 5 applied to so-called “talking points,” because the document read “very much like a fixed script” or a “final set of instructions promulgated by office leadership for staff to follow,” as opposed tp “mere suggestions”; further noting that DOJ failed to show how “previously cleared-for-release responses” would cause harm if released.
Haleem v. DOD (D.D.C.) -- in case concerning agency’s revocation of plaintiff’s security clearance, ruling that: (1) plaintiff’s duplicative request sought only records that the agency had previously withheld, and therefore the court would abstain from reviewing the adequacy of the agency’s original search; (2) plaintiff exhausted his administrative remedies by appealing from the agency’s denial of plaintiff’s duplicate request; (3) in camera review confirmed that agency properly relied on Exemption 7(E) to withhold responsive records detailing procedures and techniques used for law-enforcement purposes; moreover, because the agency demonstrated that disclosure created risk of circumvention of law, no further foreseeable harm analysis was necessary.
Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2024 are available here. Earlier opinions are available here.
Inst. For Energy Research v. Dep't of the Treasury (D.D.C.) -- deciding that plaintiff was ineligible for attorney’s fees in connection with its requests for correspondence concerning the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022; reasoning that “the record demonstrates that IRS initiated its search and review process before any action was filed, IER cannot prove that its litigation catalyzed the agency's response.”
Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2024 are available here. Earlier opinions are available here.
Found. for Gov’t Accountability v. DOJ (M.D. Fla.) --granting DOJ’s renewed summary motion following in camera inspection of three documents pertaining to Executive Order 14019; finding that: (1) DOJ properly relied on Exemption 5’s deliberative process privilege to withhold “a compilation of fragmented notes” of a DOJ employee memorializing a listening session in which voting rights advocates shared ideas and strategies with the White House and executive branch officials; and (2) DOJ properly relied on Exemption 5’s presidential communications privilege to withhold its strategic plan and rejecting plaintiff’s arguments that: (a) disclosure of fact sheet and strategic plans by other agencies waived the privilege for DOJ; (b) that the President was required to personally invoke the privilege; and (c) that the strategic plan reflected only DOJ decision-making, not presidential decision-making; further finding that DOJ’s strategic plan was treated as a confidential document and that DOJ sufficiently identified multiple foreseeable harms.
Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2024 are available here. Earlier opinions are available here.
Bal v. U.S. Dep't of the Treasury (S.D.N.Y.) -- finding that: (1) Treasury performed adequate search for records pertaining to blockage of pro se plaintiff’s $400 PayPal payment to a third party to rent an apartment in Cuba; (2) Treasury properly relied on Exemption 4 to withhold specific details about transaction at issue, noting that both Treasury and PayPal “keep this information confidential in order to prevent others from future sanctions evasions”; and (3) Treasury properly relied on Exemption 6 to redact a telephone number and names of PayPal employees who were involved in the blocking of plaintiff’s funds.
Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2024 are available here. Earlier opinions are available here.
Pub. Health & Med, Professionals for Transparency v. FDA (N.D. Tex.) -- denying FDA’s summary judgment motion after concluding that the agency’s search for records pertaining to Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine improperly omitted the agency’s Emergency Use Authorization file.
Intercept Media v. Nat’l Parks Serv. (S.D.N.Y.) -- determining that: (1) agency’s investigation into whether an employee wrongfully killed a gray wolf qualified as “law enforcement” for Exemption 7 purposes, because the results of the investigation could have resulted in criminal liability; (2)(a) subject of investigation had no privacy interest in the details about the incident he disclosed to the media; (b) despite subject’s low rank, public interest in disclosure outweighed subject’s limited privacy interest in non-public investigatory details; (3) agency properly withheld identifying information about third parties, such as the complainant, witnesses, suspected co-conspirators, and other third parties, pursuant to Exemption 7(C); and (4) based on court’s in camera review of disputed records, agency was required to segregate and disclose non-identifying information pertaining to third parties.
Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2024 are available here. Earlier opinions are available here.