Court opinions issued Feb. 5, 2019

Blakeney v. FBI (D.D.C.) — finding that: (1) Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys conducted adequate search for records pertaining to plaintiff’s criminal case and properly relied on Exemptions 5, 6, and 7(C); and (2) plaintiff’s claim against FBI was barred because plaintiff failed to pay FBI’s FOIA processing fees.

Det. Watch Network v. ICE (S.D.N.Y) -- ruling that plaintiffs were eligible and entitled to attorney’s fees and costs incurred during appellate litigation over immigration detention contracts, and that government was responsible for paying those fees even though third-party intervenors litigated at appellate levels.

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

Court opinion issued Feb. 4, 2019

Story of Stuff Project v. U.S. Forest Serv. (D.D.C.) -- ruling that agency properly relied on Exemptions 4, 5, and 9 to withhold records pertaining to operations of Nestlé Waters in San Bernardino National Forest, but that names of company employees who submitted permit-related reports were not protected by Exemption 6. Of note, the court determined that records pertaining to the company’s “boreholes” constituted “wells” for purposes of Exemption 9.

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

Court opinion issued Jan. 31, 2019

Amadis v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- concluding that: (1) plaintiff, who was denied visa to U.S. due to drug arrest, was required but failed to appeal timely responses of DEA and FBI, notwithstanding that agencies offered to perform additional searches if plaintiff submitted more information; (2) DEA performed adequate search for records pertaining to its processing of one of plaintiff’s requests; (3) FBI properly invoked Exemption 7(E) to withhold FOIA processing records pertaining to agency’s Glomar response to plaintiff’s earlier request; (4) Office of Information Policy properly interpreted scope of plaintiff’s request and it properly relied on Exemptions 5 and 6 to withhold records concerning its processing of plaintiff’s appeals; (5) State Department conducted reasonable search for records pertaining to its processing of plaintiff’s earlier request.

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

Court opinions issued Jan. 30, 2019

Friends of the Earth v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng'rs (W.D. Wash.) -- ordering agency to release biological evaluation prepared by consultant to British Petroleum (BP) after determining that: (1) “consultant corollary” doctrine of Exemption 5 was inapplicable because: (a) documents were not agency records (presumably referring to inter- and intra-agency communications threshold); and (b) BP and its consultant were not acting on behalf of agency; (2) deliberative process privilege was inapplicable because documents were not pre-decisional; and (3) agency waived any privilege by sharing document with BP.

Linder v. Exec. Officer for U.S. Attorneys (D.D.C.) -- ruling that EOUSA properly withheld grand jury testimony pursuant to Exemption 3 in conjunction with Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

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

Court opinion issued Jan. 29, 2019

Spataro v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- concluding on renewed summary judgement motion that: (1) FBI conducted adequate search by virtue of recovering records concerning criminal investigation of plaintiff that had been damaged by Hurricane Sandy; (2) FBI performed proper segregability review of remediated records and justified its use of Exemption 3 and 7(D) to withhold other records.

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

Court opinion issued Jan. 25, 2019

Judicial Watch v. DOD (D.C. Cir.) -- affirming district court’s decision that the presidential communications privilege protected in full five memoranda that “memorialized advice to the President and his top national security advisers when the President was considering whether to order a military strike on Osama bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan.”

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

Court opinion issued Jan. 24, 2019

Sandoval v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- on government’s second renewed motion for summary judgment, ruling that DOJ, Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, and U.S. Attorney’s Office for Central Illinois performed adequate searches for records pertaining to plaintiff-inmate.

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

Court opinion issued Jan. 22, 2019

Brennan Ctr. for Justice v. DHS (D.D.C.) -- reducing plaintiff’s requested fee award from $14,765 to $10,765 because time that plaintiff spent reviewing responsive records was not exclusively for purposes of litigation strategy, and because plaintiff’s “fee-on-fee” charges were unreasonably high.

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

Court opinion issued Jan. 17, 2019

Dillon v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- determining that: (1) FBI failed to sufficiently address why it did not produced three known emails pertaining to investigation of Bruce Ivins, who killed himself before being indicted for anthrax attacks in 2001; and (2) in camera review was warranted for requested excerpts of FBI’s interim 2006 case report, which agency claimed was entirely exempt pursuant to deliberative process privilege.

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

Court opinion issued Jan. 16, 2019

Rocky Mountain Wild v. U.S. Bureau of Land Mgmt. (D. Colo., 2019) -- ruling that: (1) plaintiff’s claim concerning agency’s untimely response became moot once agency fully responded; (2) plaintiff’s claim seeking referral to Special Counsel was an invalid cause of action; and (3) plaintiff failed to establish that agency has pattern-or-practice claim of FOIA violations.

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