Court opinions issued Dec. 19, 2022

Platsky v. FBI (2nd Cir.) (summary order) -- affirming district court’s ruling that FBI properly relied on Exemption 7(E) in refusing to confirm or deny records indicating whether plaintiff appeared on watchlist.

Naumes v. Dep’t of the Army (D.D.C.) -- on renewed summary judgment, ruling that Army properly withheld three sets of survey questions pursuant to Exemption 4 because questions were designed and voluntarily submitted by private scientist who held copyright.

Nat’l Pub. Radio v. U.S. Cent. Command (S.D. Cal.) -- determining that agency performed reasonable search for records concerning the First Battle of Fallujah on April 12, 2004, and denying plaintiff’s request for declaratory judgment regarding government’s untimely response.

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

Court opinion issued Dec. 15, 2022

Dec. 15, 2022

Proj. on Gov’t Oversight v. U.S. Dep’t of the Treasury (D.D.C.) -- finding that Treasury performed reasonable search for certain emails of seven senior officials, rejecting plaintiff’s argument that Treasury was required to prove that employees followed policy of forwarding work-related emails on their personal accounts to their official Treasury accounts.

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

Court opinions issued Dec. 14, 2022

Frost v. DOJ (9th Cir.) (unpublished) -- affirming district court’s decision, noting that appellant failed to raise genuine dispute about the adequacy of government’s search for records and that court would not consider issues raised for first time on appeal.

Wine v. Dep’t of the Interior (D.D.C.) -- denying plaintiff’s motion to amend court’s judgment that plaintiff failed to appeal from agency’s partial denial of his request for records concerning himself.

Young v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- ruling that FBI performed reasonable search for informant records pertaining to plaintiffs criminal prosecution and that it properly withheld records pursuant to Exemption 7(D).

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

Court opinion issued Dec. 9, 2022

Harrington v. HHS (D.D.C.) -- denying plaintiff’s request for attorney’s fees after concluding that plaintiff was ineligible for fees. Specifically, the court found that plaintiff failed to show that “his lawsuit substantially caused HHS to release records. HHS began processing [plaintiff’s] requests before he filed his complaint, and any delays by HHS were fairly attributable to the scope of [plaintiff’s] requests and a substantial backlog of other FOIA requests.”

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

Court opinion issued Dec. 1, 2022

Greenspan v. Bd. of Governors of the Fed. Reserve Sys. (D.D.C.) -- finding that: (1) Board properly relied on Exemption 4 to withhold communications received from two private firms that contained their internal economic analyses; and (2) Board properly invoked Exemption 5’s deliberative process privilege to withhold other communications sent and received by Chairman Powell containing the term “bubble” or “taper tantrum.”

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

Court opinions issued Nov. 30, 2022

Immerso v. DOL (2nd Cir.) (unpublished) -- affirming district court’s “well-reasoned” decision that plaintiff was not entitled to discovery and concluding that district court did not abuse its discretion by imposing filing sanctions on plaintiff and her attorney.

Berk v. Exec. Office of United States Attorneys (5th Cir.) (unpublished) -- affirming district court’s decision that multiple agencies performed reasonable searches for records concerning plaintiff’s prosecution and properly withheld certain records; further affirming district court’s ruling that plaintiff was not entitled to appointment of counsel.

Farahi v. FBI (D.D.C.) --ruling that: (1) FBI properly relied on Exemption 7(A) to withhold records pertaining to plaintiff’s immigration removal proceedings, but agency’s 2019 ex parte declaration was now outdated on the issue of whether enforcement proceedings remained pending or reasonably anticipated; and (2) for reasons that could not be stated on public record, FBI needed to provide additional information to the court in order to satisfy statute’s segregability requirements.

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

Court opinions issued Nov. 28, 2022

Ryan, LLC v. U.S. Dep't of Interior (5th Cir.) -- in reverse-FOIA case concerning tax adviser’s “formula” for recovering overpaid royalties, vacating and remanding district court’s decision after concluding that district court and agency did not “fully explore the record or the Supreme Court’s decision in Food Marketing Institute v. Argus Leader Media, 139 S. Ct. 2356 (2019).”

Shem-Tov v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- dismissing case for failure to prosecute because plaintiff, who sought records to defend herself in her criminal trial in Israel, neglected to contact the court for nearly five months and disregarded three court orders during that time period.

Competitive Enter. Inst. v. Podesta (D.D.C.) -- dismissing two defendants from case, John Podesta and the National Climate Task Force, because neither are agencies subject to FOIA.

Accuracy in Media v. DOD (D.D.C.) -- in case involving records related to the 2012 attack on the United States Embassy in Benghazi, Libya, adopting magistrate judge’s report and recommendation finding that: (1) DOD performed adequate search for records and properly withheld 12 pages of maps pursuant to Exemption 1; (2) CIA properly relied on Exemption 3 in conjunction with the CIA Act of 1949 and National Security Act of 1947 to withhold records related to a complaint sent to CIA’s Inspector General; and (3) issue of FBI’s Glomar response was moot because FBI agreed to search for requested records after the magistrate issued his recommendation.

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

Court opinions issued Nov. 22-23, 2022

Nov. 23, 2022

Democracy Forward Found. v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- adopting magistrate’s report and recommendation finding that EOUSA adequately searched for records of communications with Trump Transition Team, except for agency’s failure to actually search for emails records of certain employees rather than merely asking those employees whether requested communications exist.

Nov. 22, 2022

Wattleton v. DOJ (D.D.C. ) -- determining that EOUSA performed adequate search for records indicating whether any individuals or entities accessed case information from various databases related to plaintiff’s criminal prosecution.

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

Court opinions issued Nov. 21, 2022

Clemente v. FBI (D.D.C.) -- granting FBI’s unopposed motion for summary judgment after finding that: (1) FBI performed adequate search for records related to Jeffrey Epstein and his alleged criminal activities; and (2) FBI properly withheld records pursuant to Exemptions 1, 3, 5, 7(A), 7(C), 7(D), and 7(E), and that it also properly withheld records previously sealed by court order.

Dalal v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- in case concerning records of plaintiff’s antisemitic crimes, ruling that: (1) FBI’s search was not entirely adequate because it failed to explain why it would be unduly burdensome to search Special Agent’s informant files; (2) FBI properly withheld records pursuant to Exemptions 1, 3, 7(C), 7(D), 7(E), and Exemption 5’s attorney work-product and attorney-client privileges, but it improperly relied on Exemption 5’s deliberative process privilege and Exemption 7(A); (3) EOUSA conducted an adequate search, properly withheld records pursuant to Exemption 3 and attorney work-product privilege, and failed to show that Exemption 7(C) protected a search warrant application in full; and (3) FEMA conducted an adequate search, properly withheld records pursuant to Exemption 6, and failed to establish the applicability of Exemption 7(E).

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

Court opinion issued Nov. 18, 2022

Nat'l Ass'n of Minority Veterans v. U.S. Dep't of Veterans Affairs (D.D.C.) -- ruling that correspondence between the parties after litigation commenced concerning the scope of plaintiff’s request was not an improper attempt by plaintiff to expand request, and therefore the agency was required to justify the withholdings that it had made in the course of processing plaintiff’s modified request.

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