Court opinions issued Mar. 3, 2020

James Madison Proj. v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- concluding that DOJ properly relied on Exemption 1 to withhold records concerning an application made to the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court regarding Carter Page, rejecting plaintiff’s argument that a White House press release constituted a declassification order from President Trump.

Wattleton v. Berryhill (D.D.C.) -- determining that plaintiff failed to rebut Social Security Administration’s claim that it never received his undated and unsigned request for records concerning himself, and that his subsequent Privacy Act claim for the same records failed to provide information about himself required by agency policies.

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

Court opinions issued Mar. 2, 2020

Immerso v. DOL (E.D.N.Y.) (Mag. J.) -- denying plaintiff’s motion to compel disclosure of email withheld by agency under Exemption 4 because disputed document was pending in camera review by the district court judge.

Karam v. HHS (D. Ariz.) -- adopting magistrate’s report and recommendation to grant government’s summary judgment motion after finding that agency performed reasonable search and justified its use of exemptions, and that plaintiff primarily disputed only the agency’s delay in responding to her request.

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

Court opinion issued Feb. 28, 2020

Protect Our Defs. v. DOD (D.Conn.) -- denying government’s motion for reconsideration of court’s July 12, 2019 decision because supplemental declaration and case law cited by government would not have altered court’s conclusion that government failed to meet its burden with respect to Exemptions 5 & 6.

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

Court opinion issued Feb. 27, 2020

Urban Air Initiative v. EPA (D.D.C.) -- ruling that plaintiffs were eligible and entitled to attorneys’ fees and costs notwithstanding having some commercial interest in making their request, but reducing award from the $189,288.40 plaintiffs requested to $75,400 because of excessive hourly rates and excessive hours spent on certain aspects of the litigation.

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

Court opinions issued Feb. 25, 2020

Schoeffler v. USDA (9th Cir.) (unpublished) -- affirming district court’s decision that agency performed adequate search and that plaintiff was not entitled to discovery.

O'Neill v. DOJ (W.D. Wis.) -- concluding that Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys and Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms, Tobacco, and Explosives conducted adequate searches for certain records pertaining to the Outlaws Motorcycle Club, and that plaintiff failed to show that he was entitled to injunctive relief for future FOIA requests based on defendants’ alleged history of FOIA violations.

Ojeda v. Dep't of Veterans Affairs (S.D. W.Va.) -- dismissing claim because plaintiff conceded that he failed to administrative appeal agency’s decision before filing lawsuit.

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

Court opinion issued Feb. 24, 2020

Withey v. FBI (W.D. Wash.) -- denying plaintiff’s discovery requests after finding that FBI’s declarations were sufficient for court to determine whether agency conducted an adequate search and properly withheld information concerning the murders of labor activists Gene Viernes and Silme Domingo.

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

Court opinion issued Feb. 21, 2020

Jordan v. DOL (8th Cir.) (per curiam) -- summarily affirming district court’s decision to dismiss some of plaintiff’s claims as duplicative of pending litigation.

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

Court opinion issued Feb. 19, 2020

Aguirre v. Nuclear Regulatory Comm’n (S.D. Cal.) -- concluding that: (1) plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies for one request because he failed to pay advanced fee, inform agency that he believed he was not required to pay that fee, or request a fee waiver; (2) for second request, plaintiff ignored agency’s request for clarification about scope of request and thus failed to “perfect” request before filing suit.

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

Court opinions issued Feb. 18, 2020

Leopold v. Office of Dir. of Nat’l Intelligence (D.D.C.) -- ruling that ODNI, CIA, and State properly relied on Exemption 5’s deliberative process privilege to withhold records concerning Russian interference in the 2016 United States presidential election, including agency discussions about making public statements on same subject.

Vizcarra Calderon & Castenda Sanchez v. DHS (D.D.C.) -- holding that Department of State properly withheld records concerning plaintiffs’ visa denials pursuant to Exemption 3 in conjunction with section 222(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Aguirre v. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n (S.D. Cal.) -- finding that plaintiff filed lawsuit before expiration of agency’s 20-day response deadline and that plaintiff’s arguments as to why court should waive the requirements of exhaustion of administrative remedies were “borderline ridiculous.”

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

Court opinion issued Feb. 12, 2020

Husch Blackwell LLP v. EPA (D.D.C.) -- ruling that: (1) EPA failed to perform adequate search for communications between agency and two organizations concerning the herbicide gyphosate; (2) EPA properly relied on the deliberative process privilege to withhold talking points prepared for congressional testimony or press inquiries; (3) EPA failed to describe with sufficient particularity how two withheld records qualified for protection under the attorney-client privilege; and (4) EPA properly invoked Exemption 6 to withhold employee’s email of a purely personal nature with an acquaintance of family member , including that individual’s email address.

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