Satterlee v. IRS (W.D. Mo.) -- granting agency’s supplemental motion for summary judgment after finding that agency released all remaining responsive records, specifically the oath of office of a Revenue Officer and plaintiff’s taxpayer transcripts, which documented all “balance-due notices” that had been sent to plaintiff.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
Insider, Inc. v. GSA (D.D.C.) -- holding that agency properly relied on Exemption 6 to withhold names of five members of 2020 presidential transition teams from GSA’s transition expenditure records; agreeing with agency that team members were not public figures and would face threats or harassment, whereas disclosure would shed “almost nothing: about GSA’s operations.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
Roberson v. FBI (D.D.C.) -- determining that: (1) plaintiff exhausted his administrative remedies because his lawsuit was deemed filed on the date he provided it to prison officials for mailing, which preceded the FBI’s untimely response by two days; and (2) doctrine of res judicata did not preclude plaintiff from bringing his FOIA claim.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
Barrack v. DOJ (D. Colo.) -- concluding that plaintiff lacked standing to challenge the National Security Division’s denial of his attorney’s FOIA request, because the request did not indicate that it was made on behalf of plaintiff; rejecting plaintiff’s argument that NSD was sufficiently aware on whose behalf the request was submitted so as to confer standing, noting that plaintiff was mentioned only once in an email to the Office of Information Policy.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
Nat'l Sec. Archive v. CIA (D.D.C.) -- relying on government’s ex parte, in camera declarations, holding that CIA properly invoked on Exemptions 1 and 3 to withhold in full a memo drafted by the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency in 1989, notwithstanding State Department’s subsequent publication of memo’s transcribed text with minor redactions.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
McMichael v. DOJ (D. Del.) -- determining that plaintiff was eligible and entitled to an award of costs and nearly all requested attorney’s fees in case involving FBI’s investigatory records concerning theft of jewels from Royal Family of Hesse by U.S. military officers during World War 2.
Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Wash. v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- deciding that: (1) EOUSA and OIP conducted adequate searches for travel, budget, and expense records pertaining to John Durham’s investigation of the 2016 presidential campaign; and (2) DOJ properly withheld records pursuant to Exemptions 6, 7(A), 7(C), and 7(F).
Jarvis v. HUD (D.D.C.) -- concluding that agency performed adequate search for records concerning plaintiff’s housing complaints, rejecting plaintiff’s allegations of a conspiracy between the agency and property company to conceal records.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
Kendrick v. FBI (D.D.C.) -- finding that FBI performed adequate search for records pertaining to plaintiff, properly withheld records pursuant to Exemptions 7(C), 7(D), and 7(E), and met the foreseeable harm requirement; noting that satisfying the terms of exemptions outside of Exemption 5 by itself “goes a long way to meeting the foreseeable harm requirement.”
Nat'l Pub. Radio v. DHS (D.D.C.) -- concluding that DHS improperly relied on Exemption 5’s deliberative process privilege to withhold mostly factual information contained in investigatory reports of immigrant detention facilities, and it failed to show that any of its withholdings met the foreseeable harm requirement.
Am. Small Bus. League v. OMB (N.D. Cal.) -- ruling that OMB performed a reasonable search for records indicating the total federal acquisition budget for FY 2017, FY 2018, and FY 2019, and that plaintiff impermissibly expanded the scope of its request after commencing litigation.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
Hall & Assocs. v. EPA (D.D.C.) -- determining that: (1) agency performed adequate search for records transmitted between headquarters and Region 7 concerning November 2013 meeting; (2) agency properly relied on Exemptions 5’s deliberative process, attorney work-product, and attorney-client privileges to withhold portion of email discussing possible enforcement action; and (3) in camera inspection was required to ascertain whether eleven documents concerning contemplated regulatory action contained purely factual material; (4) agency conducted adequate search for certain enforcement orders and properly withheld most, but not all, records pertaining to draft administrative order pursuant to multiple Exemption 5 privileges.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
Argyle Sys. v. IRS (D.D.C.) -- concluding that IRS properly invoked Exemption 3 in conjunction with 26 U.S.C. § 6103(a) to categorically withhold various records, including Reporting Agent Authorization forms (i.e., Forms 8655); further concluding that statute’s foreseeable harm provision does not apply to Exemption 3 withholdings.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
Freeman v. FBI (D.D.C.) -- granting FBI’s unopposed renewed summary judgment and finding that agency properly withheld internal secure fax numbers pursuant to Exemption 7(C) and intranet and internal web addresses pursuant to Exemption 7(E).
Black Hills Clean Water Alliance v. U.S. Forest Serv. (D.S.D.) -- granting plaintiff’s discovery request regarding agency’s search notwithstanding lack of unusual circumstances and D.C. Circuit precedent disfavoring routine discovery.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.