Court opinions issued Aug. 3, 2020

Butt v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- determining that EOUSA performed adequate search for records concerning plaintiff except for excluding U.S. Attorney from search, and that agency properly withheld records pursuant to Exemption 5’s attorney work-product privilege.

Liounis v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- on remand from the D.C. Circuit, ruling that government performed reasonable search for grand jury records pertaining to plaintiff’s criminal case.

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

Court opinion issued July 31, 2020

Day v. U.S. Dep’t of the Treasury (D.D.C.) -- finding that plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies because he was unable to demonstrate that his request was received by IRS, which averred that it never received it.

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

Court opinion issued July 30, 2020

Eakin v. DOD (W.D. Tex.) -- granting plaintiff’s motion to amend his complaint to include FOIA request for additional Individual Deceased Personnel Files of World War II service members even though scheduling order’s amendment deadline in pending lawsuit lapsed three years ago.

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

Court opinion issued July 29, 2020

Gonzalez v. USCIS (S.D.N.Y.) — finding that government performed adequate search for records concerning plaintiff and that it properly withheld records pursuant to Exemptions 7(E) and 7(F).

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

Court opinions issued July 27, 2020

Bloche v. DOD (D.D.C.) -- on renewed summary judgment, which plaintiffs did not dispute, ruling that Department of the Army had justified its use of deliberative process and attorney-client privileges to withhold one document concerning involvement of medical professionals in designing and implementing interrogation tactics.

Aguiar v. EOUSA (D.D.C.) -- denying plaintiff’s request for litigation costs because plaintiff did not obtain judicial relief or demonstrate that his lawsuit “substantially caused” agency to respond to his FOIA requests. In analyzing “catalyst theory” prong, the court noted that EOUSA had been in contact with plaintiff before his lawsuit, worked with him to narrow requests, and produced some documents.

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

Court opinion issued July 24, 2020

Am. Ctr. for Law & Justice v. NSA (D.D.C.) -- ruling that: (1) National Security Agency properly relied on Exemptions 1 and 3 in refusing to confirm or deny existence of records pertaining to unmasking of Trump campaign official by five Obama Administration officials; (2) State Department’s similar Glomar response was invalid as to unmasking requests from Susan Power regarding Michael Flynn because Office of the Director of National Intelligence officially acknowledged their existence; (3) NSA’s search for certain communications referring to Donald Trump or campaign officials was partially inadequate because search terms used regarding Cheryl Mills were too limited; (4) State Department properly relied on deliberative process privilege to withhold various communications sent or received by Susan Power.

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

Court opinions issued July 22, 2020

Am. Oversight v. U.S. Dep’t of the Treasury (D.D.C.) -- holding that Treasury properly relied on Exemption 5’s deliberative process privilege to withhold communications between Treasury officials and Congress pertaining to potential tax code legislation. Of note, the court found that Treasury had solicited advice from Congress and, therefore, the disputed communications qualified as “inter-agency” or “intra-agency” under consultant corollary doctrine.

Democracy Forward Found. v. U.S. Dep’t of Commerce (D.D.C.) -- ruling that agency was required to search Commerce Secretary’s personal email account for government-related communications because record showed that he used personal email account for official business.

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

Court opinion issued July 20, 2020

Manatt v. DHS (E.D. Pa.) -- finding that: (1) USCIS failed to show that it performed adequate search for records relating to government’s so-called ‘Zero-Tolerance Policy for Criminal Illegal Entry”; (2) plaintiffs did not muster enough evidence to show that USCIS has pattern or practice of violating FOIA, but stating that court “suspects that USCIS does, in fact” have one; (3) agency properly relied on Exemption 5’s deliberative process privilege to withhold deliberations about communications with press, public, and Congress, but that other withholdings were unclear; and (4) ordering senior DHS official to appear before court to explain why agency ignored court’s order to process records by certain date.

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

Court opinions issued July 15, 2020

Philips v. Dep’t of the Navy (D.D.C.) -- concluding that agency performed reasonable search for records pertaining to plaintiff’s murder trial and that it properly withheld records about third parties pursuant to Exemptions 6 and 7(C).

Greenlaw v. Scalia (N.D. Cal.) -- finding that Department of Labor’s properly relied on Exemptions 6 and 7(C) to withhold certain third-party information from documents she maintained on her work computer.

Moujtahid v. USCIS (W.D. Wash.) -- holding that agency properly relied on Exemption 6 to withhold records from A-files of third parties, as well as Exemption 7(C) to withhold names of individuals under investigation, notwithstanding asserted public interest that disclosure would assist in discovering potential plaintiffs in civil RICO action.

Madel v. DOJ (D. Minn.) — ruling that Drug Enforcement Administration’s declaration was “devoid of specificity” and “patently insufficient” to justify agency’s reliance on Exemption 4 to withhold records provided by Cardinal Health about distribution of oxycodone.

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

Court opinion issued July 14, 2020

Price v. DOJ (D.D.C.) - - finding that: (1) Office of Justice Programs conducted adequate searches in response to only three of ten requests related to child pornography investigations and prosecutions; Criminal Division performed reasonable searches for organizational chart and operating manual; (2) ordering agencies to submit ex parte declarations explaining whether they relied on any exclusions, as referenced in their response letters, and to justify their use if so; (3) OJP failed to provide sufficient information for court to evaluate its withholdings under Exemptions 6, 7(E), and 7(F); (4) Criminal Division properly withheld records pursuant to Exemption 6, 7(C), and 7(E), but did not demonstrate that Exemption 2 was properly used.

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