Court opinions issued Jan. 16, 2020

Animal Legal Def. Fund v. FDA (9th Cir.) (unpublished) -- in light of U.S. Supreme Court’s decision Food Market Inst. v. Argus Leader, vacating and remanding district court’s decision that FDA improperly relied on Exemption 4 to withhold four categories of inspection report information concerning egg production facilities.

Ullah v. CIA (D.D.C.) -- ruling that CIA properly invoked Exemptions 1 and 3 to withhold records about the disposition of detainee’s body after he died in agency’s overseas detention facility.

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

Court opinions issued Jan. 15, 2020

Singh v. U.S. Dep’t of State (W.D. Was.) -- determining that agency performed adequate search for records concerning denial of visa for plaintiff’s wife, and that it properly withheld certain records pursuant to Exemption 3 in conjunction with the Immigration and Nationality Act of the United States.

Niskanen Ctr. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n (D.D.C.) -- concluding that names and addresses of private homeowners affected by pipeline were protected from disclosure under Exemption 6, and accepting government’s offer to release the initials of homeowners and the street addresses (but not house numbers).

James Madison Project v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- holding that: (1) CIA properly withheld records pertaining to John Kiriakou pursuant to Exemptions 1, 3, and 5 (attorney-client, attorney work product, and deliberative process); (2) FBI, EOUSA, and Nat’l Sec. Div. properly withheld records pursuant to Exemption 1; (3) FBI properly withheld its entire investigative file concerning Mr. Kiriakou pursuant to Exemption 6 and 7(C).

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

Court opinion issued Jan. 14, 2020

Bixseth v. U.S. Immigrations & Customs Enf't (D.D.C.) -- concluding that ICE performed adequate search for records concerning plaintiff and that it properly withheld certain records pursuant to Exemption 7(C) and 7(E).

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

Court opinions issued Jan. 9, 2020

S. Envtl. Law Ctr. v. Bernhardt (W.D. Va.) -- determining that plaintiff set forth sufficient allegations to establish standing to pursue claim that Department of the Interior unlawfully delays FOIA responses, in part, by employing polices and practices associated with an "Awareness Process Memorandum" issued by DOI on May 24, 2018, a "Deliberative Process Memorandum" issued to the Fish and Wildlife Service on September 6, 2018, and a "Foreseeable Harm Memorandum" issued by DOI on December 29, 2017.

Stevens v. U.S. Immigration & Customs Enf't. (N.D. Ill.) -- ruling that: (1) ICE failed to perform adequate search for correspondence pertaining to U.S. citizenship claims; (2) ICE failed to show that it properly invoked Exemptions 5, 6, and 7(C) to redact “statement of the case" and "facts" sections of U.S. citizenship claims memoranda.

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

Court opinion issued Jan. 8, 2020

Mich. Immigrant Rights Ctr. v DHS (E.D. Mich.) -- denying plaintiff’s request for award of interim fees after finding, among other things, that plaintiff would not suffer financial hardship or be unable to continue litigation, which was nearing its conclusion.

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

Court opinion issued Jan. 6, 2020

Knight First Amendment Inst. v. CIA (D.D.C.) -- ruling that the CIA, FBI, NSA, and the the Office of the Director of National Intelligence properly relied on Exemptions 1 and 3 in refusing to confirm or deny the existence of certain records concerning the killing of Jamal Khashoggi, notwithstanding State Department’s public statement about the matter.

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

Court opinion issued Jan. 3, 2020

Bell v. ATF (D.D.C.) -- concluding that agency performed adequate search for records pertaining to four murder victims and that it properly relied on Exemption 7(C) to withheld certain information pertaining to living third parties.

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

Court opinions issued Dec. 31, 2019

Flippin v. Dep’t of the Interior (D.D.C.) -- dismissing action against U.S. Capitol Police because it is not an agency subject to FOIA, and dismissing action against DOI because plaintiff filed his suit on the same day he submitted his request, thus failing to exhaust his administrative remedies.

Ctr. for Investigative Reporting v. DHS (D.D.C.) -- ruling that: (1) agency properly withheld certain records concerning related to border fence/border wall contract proposals pursuant to Exemptions 3, 6, 7(C), and 7(E), which plaintiff did not contest; (2) agency failed to establish that Exemption 5 applied to withheld records or that statute’s foreseeable harm standard was met; and (3) agency failed to demonstrate that information withheld under Exemption 4 was customarily treated as confidential by particular submitters, provided under assurance of confidentiality, or met statute’s foreseeable harm standard.

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

Court opinion issued Dec. 20, 2019

Shapiro v. DOJ (D.C. Cir.) -- reversing and remanding district court’s decision after finding that FBI failed to satisfactorily explain: (a) why files listed on search slip were not responsive to plaintiff’s request, or (b) how it confirmed that listed files had been destroyed.

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

Court opinions issued Dec. 19, 2019

Freeman v. Exec. Office of US Attorneys (D. Colo.) -- concluding that EOUSA properly relied on Exemption 3, in conjunction with Rule 6(e) of Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, to withhold transcript of plaintiff’s cross examination before grand jury; noting that federal rule permitting witnesses the right to “review” their grand jury testimony is inapplicable to FOIA claims.

Pavement Coatings Tech. Council v. U.S. Geological Survey (D.D.C.) -- determining that agency properly relied on Exemption 5 (deliberative process privilege) to withhold various scientific research pertaining to coal tar sealants, and that agency properly relied on Exemption 6 to withhold identifying information about volunteers participating in agency’s study.

Tokar v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- (1) declining to order briefing on plaintiff’s attorney fees and costs following DOJ’s mid-litigation decision to release emails previously withheld as “non-responsive”; (2) ruling that DOJ failed to establish that it properly invoked Exemptions 6 and 7(C) to withhold names of individual clients of corporate compliance monitors.

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