FOIA Advisor

Court opinions issued Aug. 26, 2024

Court Opinions (2015-2024)Ryan MulveyComment

Am. Wild Horse Campaign v. BLM (D.D.C.) — in a case concerning a report on the inhuman treatment of animals under BLM care, denying the requester’s motion for fees and holding that it was neither “eligible” nor “entitled” to such fees and costs; explaining that the requester never “substantially prevailed” because the court never ordered any relief, and the requester failed to meet its burden to demonstrate eligibility under the “catalyst theory”; further explaining that the records received by the requester, which were largely “administrative” and already in the requester’s possession, would not benefit the public by increasing its awareness of government activities, and the agency had not be unreasonable in delaying production.

Reclaim the Records v. U.S. Dep't of State (S.D.N.Y.) — in a case concerning a request for the State Department’s “index” of reports concerning deaths of U.S. citizens abroad, granting the government’s motion for summary judgment and upholding its “no responsive records” response; accepting the agency’s representations that it no longer maintained a searchable index of death reports, but stored them in a system that could only retrieve discrete records “manually and one-at-a-time”; explaining that if the agency were to conduct individual search queries to provide the requester with a list of all death reports, that would entail the creation of records, and other “backend” search efforts would implicate non-responsive materials.

Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2024 are available here. Earlier opinions are available here.

FOIA News: Software firm releases results of FOIA survey

FOIA News (2015-2024)Allan BlutsteinComment

AI can help FOIA offices combat onslaught of bot-powered requests, report says

According to a report from software firm OPEXUS, 93% of FOIA officers believe “AI has a key role to play in helping to review, sort and deduplicate requests.”

Edward Graham, NextGov/FCW, Aug. 27, 2024

Bots powered by artificial intelligence are inundating open records offices with often frivolous petitions, but the same tools underpinning these software applications can also help professionals improve the document disclosure process, according to a survey of federal personnel who process Freedom of Information Act — or FOIA — requests.

The report, released on Tuesday by software firm OPEXUS, found that FOIA officers were concerned about declining numbers of personnel, particularly as open records requests have grown in recent years. 

Read more here.

Court opinion issued Aug. 25, 2024

Court Opinions (2015-2024)Ryan MulveyComment

Am. First Legal Found. v. FTC (D.D.C.) — in a case involving a request for records about the FTC’s regulation of Twitter, granting the government’s partial motion to dismiss; rejecting the requester’s first alternative disclosure claim under the APA for failure to state a claim because the FOIA provides an adequate remedy; also rejecting a second alternative claim under the Mandamus Act for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction; allowing the requester’s challenge under FOIA to the FTC’s use of Exemption 7(A) to proceed.

Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2024 are available here. Earlier opinions are available here.

Court opinions issued Aug. 23, 2024

Court Opinions (2015-2024)Ryan MulveyComment

Mullane v. DOJ (1st Cir.) — affirming district court’s decision that DOJ performed adequate search for records concerning its termination of plaintiff as a law student intern in 2018.

Holmes-Hamilton v. FBI (D.D.C.) — in a case involving multiple requests from survivors of three American vacationers who mysteriously died at a Dominican Republic resort, granting the FBI’s motion for summary judgment and upholding its withholding of toxicology reports, and other related records, under Exemption 7(E), which protects against the disclosure of law enforcement techniques and procedures; rejecting the FBI’s appeal to Exemption 7(D) because Dominican law enforcement authorities were not a “confidential source” and their collaboration with the FBI was never a secret; also concluding the FBI satisfied the foreseeable-harm standard and FOIA’s segregability requirement.

Judicial Watch, Inc. v. HHS (D.D.C.) — in a case concerning a request for the identity of two NIH employees involved with a research grant involving the use of human fetal tissue, granting HHS’s motion for summary judgment and upholding its use of Exemption 6 given the “sensitivity” and controversy of research into fetal tissue; noting also that the requester failed to articulate a public interest sufficient to outweigh the substantial privacy interests at stake because the identities of these employees would not shed light on official agency activities; otherwise concluding the agency satisfied the foreseeable-harm standard and rejecting the requester’s motion for limited discovery.

Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2024 are available here. Earlier opinions are available here.

Court opinion issued Aug. 21, 2024

Court Opinions (2015-2024)Allan BlutsteinComment

Libarov v. ICE (N.D. Ill.) -- determining that agency performed a reasonable search for records concerning its investigation of plaintiff for entering into a sham marriage, and that it properly withheld an investigatory report pursuant to Exemption 7(A), except for portions that set forth “basic personal information” regarding plaintiff.

Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2024 are available here. Earlier opinions are available here.

Court opinions issued Aug. 20, 2024

Court Opinions (2015-2024)Allan BlutsteinComment

Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics In Wash. v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- in case seeking records about unprosecuted individuals who might have been involved in campaign finance violations committed by Michael Cohen on behalf of Donald Trump, ruling that: (1) portions of portions of DOJ’s declarations related to correspondence between the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York and DOJ headquarters were “too conclusory and vague” to justify withholdings under Exemptions 5, 6, or 7(C); (2) DOJ properly relied on Exemptions 6 and 7(C) to withhold search warrant records; and (3) DOJ properly relied on Exemption 5’s attorney-work product privilege to withhold reports and notes of interviews conducted during the SDNY’s investigations into potential campaign finance violations and obstruction of justice.

Pretzman v. Mayorkas (D.D.C.) -- dismissing plaintiff’s FOIA claim concerning the Secret Service’s disclosure of plaintiff’s cellular number to entities investigating the attack on the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, because plaintiff’s request—which the agency processed as a request for an accounting of disclosures under the Privacy Act -- sought answers to questions rather than documents and, alternatively, was not reasonably described.

Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2024 are available here. Earlier opinions are available here.

Jobs, jobs, jobs: Weekly report Aug. 26, 2024

Jobs jobs jobs (2024)Allan BlutsteinComment

Federal positions closing in the next ten days

Gov’t Info. Specialist, Dep’t of Def./DCSA, GG 12, Fort Meade, MD, closes 8/26/24 (non-public).

Gov’t Info. Specialist, Dep’t of Veterans Affairs/VBA, GS 13, Overland, MO, closes 8/26/24 (non-public).

Gov’t Info. Specialist, Dep’t of the Treasury/IRS, GS 7-11, multiple locations, closes 8/26/24 (non-public).

Info. Mgmt. Specialist, Permitting Council, GS 13, remote, closes 8/27/24 (non-public).

Gov’t Info. Specialist, Dep’t of the Army, GG 13, Fort Meade, MD, closes 8/28/24 (non-public).

Gov’t Info. Specialist, Dep’t of Veterans Affairs/VHA, GS 12, White City, OR, closes 8/28/24 (non-public).

Gov’t Info. Specialist, Dep’t of Veterans Affairs/VHA, GS 11-12, Asheville, NC, closes 9/5/24 (non-public).

Gov’t Info. Specialist, Dep’t of the Treasury/IRS, GS 13, nationwide, closes 9/5/24 (non-public).

Court opinions issued Aug. 19, 2024

Court Opinions (2015-2024)Allan BlutsteinComment

Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Wash. v. DOJ -- following in camera review of records related to DOJ’s monitoring of certain elections, finding that: (1) DOJ properly withheld some but not all records pursuant to Exemption 5’s deliberative process privilege, and all of DOJ’s attorney work-product privilege withholdings were proper; (2) DOJ’s single-sentence justification of foreseeable harm was insufficient, but not fatal for withheld information whose sensitivity was “obvious in context”; and (3) DOJ failed to show that records withheld under Exemption 7(A) concerned pending proceedings or that disclosure would interfere with such proceedings.

Buzzfeed v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- concluding that: (1) Executive Office for United States Attorneys performed adequate search for communications of named U.S. Attorneys pertaining to a criminal case, but it failed to sufficiently specify search terms used to locate communications of named Assistant U.S. Attorneys; (2) granting EOUSA’s withholdings under Exemptions 7(A), 7(D), and 7(F) as conceded by plaintiff, but denying agency’s categorical withholdings under Exemptions 5, 6, and 7(C) because agency offered only “broad explanations supporting the applicability of [the exemptions] to generalized categories of documents.”

Abhyanker v. USPTO (N.D. Cal.) -- determining that: (1) Patent & Trade Office performed reasonably searches for specific records that plaintiff requested concerning agency’s disciplinary case against him; (2) agency properly withheld certain records pursuant to Exemption 5’s attorney work-product and deliberative process privilege, as well as Exemptions 6, 7(A), and 7(C).

Rolling Stone LLC v. DOJ (S.D.N.Y.) -- denying plaintiff’s motion to compel DOJ to apply for an Open America stay because the motion was “really just a veiled request” to expedite DOJ’s ongoing production of documents and no “compelling need” for expedition existed.

Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2024 are available here. Earlier opinions are available here.

FOIA News: DOJ training dates for FY25

FOIA News (2015-2024)Allan BlutsteinComment

OIP Announces New FOIA Training Dates for Fiscal Year 2025

DOJ/OIP, FOIA Post, Aug. 21, 2024

Today, the Office of Information Policy (OIP) announces new dates for FOIA training during for the first half of Fiscal Year 2025.  As part of its responsibility to encourage agency compliance with the FOIA, OIP offers numerous training opportunities throughout the year for agency FOIA professionals and individuals with FOIA responsibilities. 

These courses are designed to offer training opportunities for personnel from all stages of the FOIA workforce, from new hires to the experienced FOIA professionals or FOIA managers.  OIP will continue to offer virtual training sessions that will be taught in real-time by OIP instructors.  We will announce more training opportunities for the spring and summer at a later date.  As Fiscal Year 2025 quickly approaches, we are excited to announce our upcoming virtual training courses. You can find these courses, listed on OIP’s Training page.

Read more here.

Court opinions issued Aug. 16, 2024

Court Opinions (2015-2024)Allan BlutsteinComment

Brodsky v. FBI (N.D. Ill.) -- finding after in camera review that: (1) FBI properly relied on Exemptions 3, 5, 6, 7(C), 7(D), and 7(E) to withhold records pertaining to plaintiff; and (2) FBI properly refused to confirm or deny the existence of records concerning specific third parties pursuant to Exemptions 6 and 7(C).

Organized Cmtys. Against Deportations v. ICE (N.D. Ill.) -- following in camera review of sample documents concerning agency’s Citizens Academy, ruling that Agency properly withheld records pursuant to Exemptions 6 and 7(E).

Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2024 are available here. Earlier opinions are available here.