FOIA Advisor

Court Opinions (2015-2024)

Court opinion issued Jan. 20, 2023

Court Opinions (2015-2024)Allan BlutsteinComment

State of Indiana v. President Joseph R. Biden (S. Ind.) -- in suit by 14 States against Executive Office of the President, President Biden, the U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General Garland, U.S. Department of Education, and Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona, ruling that: (1) individual defendants are not agencies subject to FOIA requests “whether named in an official capacity or not”; and (2) neither EOP, as a whole, nor the White House Office’s Domestic Policy Council are agencies to which a FOIA request may be directed.

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

Court opinions issued Jan. 18, 2023

Court Opinions (2015-2024)Allan BlutsteinComment

Microsoft Corp. v. IRS (W.D. Wash.) -- ruling that: (1) IRS performed adequate search for records concerning its longstanding audit of plaintiff, noting that agency was not required to search records created and maintained by private contractors; and (2) IRS properly withheld records pursuant to Exemptions 2, 3 (in conjunction with 26 U.S.C. § 6103), 4, 5, 6, and 7(A).

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

Court opinion issued Jan. 17, 2023

Court Opinions (2015-2024)Ryan MulveyComment

Perioperative Services & Logistics, LLC v. Dep’t of Veteran Affairs (D.C. Cir.) — on appeal, holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in choosing to accept and rely upon an ex parte declaration because, as the court below explained, “[t]his is one of the rare cases . . . where the ex parte submission, with its detailed description of the nature of the withheld document and the reasons underlying the exemption, was necessary to preserve the privacy of the third party” implicated in the underlying record; holding, further, that the agency properly applied Exemption 6 and satisfied its obligation to release reasonably segregable non-exempt portions of the record at issue.

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

Court opinion issued Jan. 13, 2023

Court Opinions (2015-2024)Allan BlutsteinComment

Conn. Fair Hous. Ctr. v. HUD (D. Conn.) -- on reconsideration, ruling that: (1) plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs would be deemed timely filed due to “unique circumstances” and lack of prejudice to HUD; (2) court clearly erred in citing Second Circuit case that was abrogated by 2007 statutory amendment endorsing “catalyst theory” for recovering fees; and (3) plaintiff failed to prove that records were released more quickly because of its lawsuit; HUD diligently responded to request initially, but it was delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic and resolving request-related legal questions.

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

Court opinion issued Jan. 11, 2023

Court Opinions (2015-2024)Allan BlutsteinComment

Bioscience Advisors, Inc. v. SEC (N.D. Cal.) -- in relevant part, determining that agency performed adequate search for multiple contract exhibits and that, in any event, plaintiff had not exhausted its administrative remedies for 83 requests; further finding that plaintiff’s claim concerning agency’s withholdings was not exhausted, either.

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

Court opinions issued Dec. 30, 2022

Court Opinions (2015-2024)Allan BlutsteinComment

Rocky Mountain Wild, Inc. v. U.S. Forest Serv. (10th Cir.) -- affirming district court’s decision and finding that: (1) plaintiff waived argument that Vaughn Index was insufficient; (2) agency performed reasonable search for voluminous records concerning proposed highway project; (3) agency properly withheld records pursuant to Exemption 5 and demonstrated prospective harm, but declining to hold that the foreseeable harm provision imposed a “heightened burden”; and (4) district court properly ordered plaintiff to return two documents that agency accidentally disclosed to plaintiff without redaction, even though another organization subsequently posted the documents online.

Wright v. HHS (D.D.C.) -- denying government’s motion to dismiss case concerning COVID-19 vaccine safety records, because agency ignored Departmental regulation to contact requester and explain why it found one of his requests to be overbroad and not reasonably described.

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

Court opinions issued Dec. 27, 2022

Court Opinions (2015-2024)Allan BlutsteinComment

Sayed v. U.S. Maritime Admin. (D. Mass.) -- concluding that agency neglected to sufficiently explain its search methodology in response to request for records pertaining to government-owned vessel docked in Alabama in 2020.

Woodward v. USMS (D.D.C.) -- on second renewed summary judgment, ruling that: (1) agency failed to show that another court’s sealing order precluded FOIA disclosure of records pertaining to use of cell phone tracking technology during criminal investigation of plaintiff; and (2) agency waived its right to make new withholding claim under Exemption 3, in conjunction with the Pen Register Act.

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

Court opinion issued Dec. 20, 2022

Court Opinions (2015-2024)Allan BlutsteinComment

NBC 7 San Diego v. DHS (D.D.C.) -- concluding that DHS and two components failed to provide sufficient explanations as to why they deemed requested records concerning a secret tracking database to be non-responsive, noting that agencies improperly considered “context” of requests instead of identified search terms.

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