Samuel v. FBI (D.S.C.) -- adopting magistrate’s recommendation to dismiss plaintiff’s case as moot because FBI released all records in response to one request and plaintiff did not appeal response in which certain information was redacted pursuant to Exemptions 6 and 7(C).
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
Ctr. for Investigative Reporting v. DOL (N.D. Cal.) — ruling that: (1) Department of Labor improperly relied on Exemption 4 to withhold certain work-related injury form received by OSHA from employers, because agency failed to show that records were both customarily and actually treated as private by owners and provide to the government under an assurance of privacy; (2) OSHA performed adequate search for other work-related injury and illness records, which agency did not start collecting during requested time period.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
Cal. Air Res. Bd. v. EPA (D.D.C.) -- concluding that: (1) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration performed adequate search for records pertaining to fuel-efficient vehicle rulemaking and properly withheld two documents pursuant to Exemption 5’s deliberative process privilege, and (2) EPA properly relied on deliberative process privilege to withhold two email threads and two draft reports.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
Long v. ICE (D.D.C.) -- following evidentiary hearing, ruling that: (1) ICE properly relied on Exemption 7(E) in denying full disclosure of databases pertaining to undocumented immigrants, but that ICE may have neglected to disclose reasonable segregable, non-exempt materials; and (2) ICE made no effort to show that a 9-page document met the law enforcement threshold of Exemption 7 and therefore must be disclosed subject to previously-approved Exemption 6 redactions.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals v. HHS (D.D.C.) -- determining that: (1) National Institutes for Health performed reasonable search for emails concerning certain animal experiments even though additional search terms were used for one custodian; (2) NIH adequately explained why it excluded as “non-responsive” 119 pages that it initially processed; (3) NIH properly relied on Exemption 6 to withhold private email account, personal travel plans, and identifying information of unpaid outside consultants; and (4) NIH failed to show that deliberative process privilege applied to agency communications about how to respond to plaintiff’s request for a meeting.
Campaign Legal Ctr. v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- finding that: (1) Justice Management Division (JMD) performed adequate search for records mentioning two Bureau of the Census employees or eight census-related terms, but Civil Rights Division (CRT) did not; (2) CRT and Office of Information Policy (OIP) failed to show that records were properly withheld pursuant to presidential communications privilege; (3) CRT and OIP properly relied on deliberative process privilege to withheld only a few contested categories of records, and JMD failed to provide sufficient information to justify its deliberative process claims; and (4) OIP improperly relied on attorney work-product privilege to withhold draft responses to interrogatories from U.S. Commission on Civil Rights..
Kowal v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- concluding that Drug Enforcement Administration conducted reasonable search pertaining to third party’s prosecution, but that deficiencies in DEA’s Vaughn Index did not enable court to assess validity of agency’s withholdings under Exemptions 6, 7(C) 7(D),7(E), and 7(F).
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
Cvijanovich v. U.S. Secret Serv. (8th Cir.) (unpublished) -- summarily affirming district court’s decision granting summary judgment to agency concerning plaintiff’s request for records about himself.
NAACP Legal Def. & Educ. Fund. v. DOJ (S.D.N.Y.) -- finding that agency failed to demonstrate that it performed reasonable search for records concerning proposed inclusion of citizenship status question on 2020 decennial census.
Sai v. TSA (D.D.C.) -- on renewed summary judgment, concluding that: (1) agency demonstrated that it properly withheld records pursuant to Exemptions 3 and 5 (deliberative process privilege); (2) agency failed to demonstrate that it searched all reasonable locations or employed reasonable search terms and proper time frame; (3) agency was not required to organize records into discrete PDF files,but that agency failed to show how it would be unduly burdensome to create “irreversible redactions within fully digital, non-rasterized PDFs” outside of FOIAExpress program that agency typically used.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
Am. Immigration Council v. ICE (D.D.C.) -- concluding that: (1) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S Customs & Border Patrol improperly relied on Exemption 7(C) to withhold full birth dates of apprehended individuals, because agencies failed to show that disclosure of birth month and year of anonymous individuals could be used to identify them; (2) ICE did not perform adequate search for unique identifiers of apprehended individuals, and CBP improperly withheld unique identifiers pursuant to Exemption 7(E); (3) CBP properly relied on Exemption 7(E) to withhold locations where individuals were apprehended; and (4) ICE was not required to create a codebook or glossary of the terms and acronyms contained in responsive spreadsheets, but it was required to search for definitions within agency databases.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
Citizens for Responsibility in Wash. v. DOJ (D.D.C) -- ruling that: (1) Office of Information Policy performed adequate search for records concerning a 2017 meeting with reporters to share private text messages sent during 2016 presidential campaign by two former FBI investigators on Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team; and (2) OIP and Office of Inspector General properly withheld as “non-responsive” individual emails and texts from whole threads because conversations veered into unrelated topics, rejecting plaintiff’s argument that FOIA defines a “record” by the manner in which it is maintained by the agency.
Glawson v. EOUSA (D.D.C.) -- determining that EOUSA performed reasonable search for certain grand jury records pertaining to plaintiff’s criminal prosecution in 2008.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
Shem-Tov v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- finding that: (1) Interpol, U.S. National Central Bureau and the Department of Homeland Security performed adequate searches for records concerning their assistance to Israel’s criminal prosecution of plaintiff; (2) USNCB and DHS properly withheld records pursuant to Exemptions 7(C) and 7(E), but that government’s evidence and briefing was too sparse with respect to Exemption 7(D).
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
Statton v. Fla. Fed. Judicial Nominating Comm’n (11th Cir.) -- affirming district court’s decision that the Florida Federal Judicial Nominating Commission, which was created by two U.S. Senators from Florida, was not a federal agency subject to FOIA.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.