Hamad v. Myorkas (S.D. Ohio) -- determining that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services properly relied on Exemptions 6, 7(C), and 7(E) to withhold records concerning agency’s investigation of plaintiff for marriage fraud.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
Fair Lines Am. Found. v. U.S. Dep't of Commerce (D.D.C.) -- ruling that Census Bureau properly withheld certain aggregated data under Exemption 3 in conjunction with 13 U.S.C. § 9(b), because agency plausibly explained that disclosure “would contribute to the ability of a third party to reconstruct the dataset.”
Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Wash. v. U.S. Dep't of the Treasury (D.D.C.) -- following in camera review, deciding that government properly withheld all but one record pursuant to Exemption 5’s deliberative process privilege.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
Deep Sea Fishermen's Union of the Pac. v. U.S. Dep't of Commerce (W.D. Wash.) -- granting agency’s motion for protective order and denying plaintiff’s request to depose agency declarant, because agency’s declaration already addressed topics raised by plaintiff and plaintiff failed to provide any evidence that declaration was made in bad faith.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
Fiscal Year 2022 Mandatory Review of Compliance With the Freedom of Information Act
Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, July 28, 2022
In May 2021, the IRS completed the transition of processing cases from the Automated Freedom of Information Act System to FOIAXpress. TIGTA reviewed a statistical sample of 83 of the 3,188 Fiscal Year 2021 FOIA requests for which the IRS denied the requested information either partially or fully based on exemption (b)(7), replied that no responsive records were available, or closed the request as imperfect. TIGTA also reviewed all 34 Fiscal Year 2021 I.R.C. § 6103(c) and (e) requests documented in FOIAXpress for which the IRS withheld information from the requestor. While TIGTA determined that information was properly withheld or released in most cases, the Disclosure Office did not follow FOIA requirements when withholding or releasing information for 13 (16 percent) cases. The Disclosure Office properly processed all 34 I.R.C. § 6103(c) and (e) requests.
Read more here.
Blake v. NSA (D.D.C.) -- determining that National Security Agency properly invoked Exemption 3, in conjunction with National Security Act of 1959, in refusing to confirm or deny existence of intelligence records related to the disappearance and death of Nicholas Blake, a United States citizen, in Guatemala in 1985.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
Moore v. CIA (D.D.C.) -- determining that: (1) plaintiff did not waive issue of the adequacy of CIA’s search for records concerning Korean War-era prisoner of war and CIA neglected to address plaintiff’s related arguments; (2) CIA properly withheld records pursuant to Exemption 1, and, with limited exceptions, properly issued Glomar responses using same exemption; and (3) CIA properly withheld records pursuant to Exemptions 3 and 6, and it performed adequate segregability analysis.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
FOIA Work Increases but Still Below Peak
FEDweek, July 27, 2022
Federal agencies both received and processed more Freedom of Information Act requests in fiscal 2021 than they did the prior year but both remained below their peak levels of 2019, according to a Justice Department report.
Agencies received just above 838,000 requests and processed about 500 more than that number, although the number deemed to be backlogged—that is, processed after the 20-day standard for regular requests and the 30-day standard if there are “unusual circumstances”—rose from about 141,800 to about 153,200. Average processing time for standard requests increased by almost 3 days to just under 33, while the average for processing expedited requests fell by about a half-day to just above 13 ½.
Read more here.
Judicial Watch v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- in case involving redactions to 4-page document concerning origin of agency’s investigation of Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, finding that: (1) FBI properly relied on Exemption 7(C) to withhold names of non-senior executive FBI officials at the GS-14 and GS-15 levels; and (2) FBI properly withheld other information pursuant to Exemptions 1, 7(D), and 7(E).
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
Hansten v. DEA (D.D.C.) -- rejecting DEA’s Exemption 7(E) Glomar response to request for DEA Forms 222 issued on particular day, because although agency “could use Form 222 in a diversion investigation, the entries on this form say nothing about how the DEA would “go about investigating” a diversion case."
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.
Lewis v. U.S. Dep’t of the Treasury (D. Md.) -- deciding that: (1) plaintiff was not entitled to money damages from Department of Veterans Affairs for disclosing records only after plaintiff filed her lawsuit; and (2) agency properly relied on Exemptions 6 and 7(C) to withhold certain records concerning plaintiff’s complaint about third party, but that it improperly withheld internal tracking numbers, information on the administrative processing and status of the complaint and investigation, and standard form instructions.”
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.