FOIA Advisor

FOIA News: Judge explodes over Hillary email delays

FOIA News (2015-2025)Kevin SchmidtComment

Judge explodes over Hillary email delays

By Rachel Bade, Politico, 7/29/15

A district court judge says he can't understand why the State Department dragged its feet responding to Freedom of Information Act requests.

An irritated federal judge Thursday put the Hillary Clinton email scandal into stark terms, grilling the State Department on a pattern of delayed document releases that has turned a possible bureaucratic logjam into a major problem for the leading Democratic presidential contender.

U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon, known for his blunt manner, said he simply did not understand why the State Department has dragged its feet on responses for emails in requests to the Freedom of Information Act.

“Now, any person should be able to review that in one day — one day,” the judge said, examining a request for just over 60 emails. “Even the least ambitious bureaucrat could do this.

Read more here.

Court opinions issued July 24 & July 28, 2015

Court Opinions (2015-2024)Allan BlutsteinComment

July 28, 2015

Smart-Tek Serv. Corp. v. Internal Revenue Serv. (S.D. Cal.) -- ruling that plaintiff maintained ability to sue IRS to obtain tax records even though it was a dissolved corporation.

Granat v. U.S. Dep't of Agric. (E.D. Cal.) -- finding that case was moot becase agency had produced all nonexempt records; rejecting plaintiff's argument that agency had engaged in pattern of delaying in responding to requests. 

July 24, 2015

Beam v. Internal Revenue Serv. (M.D. Pa.) -- dismissing case because plaintiff's administrative appeal to IRS was filed after the agency's 35-day deadline.

Summaries of all cases since April 2015 are available here.

Q&A: access to names of federal job applicants

Q&A (2015-2025)Allan BlutsteinComment

Q.   Can a requester request the names of candidates that were interviewed for a position/job in the federal government? I know that when a requester requests the names of individuals who are on the job certificate, they only see their name/information and no one else.  

A.  Courts consistently have found that agencies may withhold information about unsuccessful applicants on the grounds that their privacy interests outweigh the public interests in disclosure.  See, e.g., Neary v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. (D.D.C. 2015) (ruling that agency properly withheld identifying information of rejected interviewees under Exemption 6 of the FOIA).

Q&A: bid information from University of Florida

Q&A (2015-2025)Allan BlutsteinComment

Q.   I  requested bid information from the University of Florida and received no response within the time limit.  What are my options?

A.    As you may know, the Florida Public Records Act does not identify the specific number of days within which a public entity must respond to a public records request.   If a response in unreasonably delayed, however, you may seek mediation through the Office of the Attorney General Open Government Mediation Program, file a complaint with your local state attorney, or file a lawsuit in court.

Please note that certain bid information is exempt from disclosure.  See statutory text below:

119.071 General exemptions from inspection or copying of public records.—

(1) AGENCY ADMINISTRATION.—

(a) Examination questions and answer sheets of examinations administered by a governmental agency for the purpose of licensure, certification, or employment are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution. A person who has taken such an examination has the right to review his or her own completed examination.

(b)  1. For purposes of this paragraph, “competitive solicitation” means the process of requesting and receiving sealed bids, proposals, or replies in accordance with the terms of a competitive process, regardless of the method of procurement.

2. Sealed bids, proposals, or replies received by an agency pursuant to a competitive solicitation are exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution until such time as the agency provides notice of an intended decision or until 30 days after opening the bids, proposals, or final replies, whichever is earlier.

3. If an agency rejects all bids, proposals, or replies submitted in response to a competitive solicitation and the agency concurrently provides notice of its intent to reissue the competitive solicitation, the rejected bids, proposals, or replies remain exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution until such time as the agency provides notice of an intended decision concerning the reissued competitive solicitation or until the agency withdraws the reissued competitive solicitation. A bid, proposal, or reply is not exempt for longer than 12 months after the initial agency notice rejecting all bids, proposals, or replies.

4. This paragraph is subject to the Open Government Sunset Review Act in accordance with s. 119.15 and shall stand repealed on October 2, 2016, unless reviewed and saved from repeal through reenactment by the Legislature.

(c) Any financial statement that an agency requires a prospective bidder to submit in order to prequalify for bidding or for responding to a proposal for a road or any other public works project is exempt from s. 119.07(1) and s. 24(a), Art. I of the State Constitution.

FOIA News: ICYMI, DOJ publishes summary of Chief FOIA Officer reports

FOIA News (2015-2025)Allan BlutsteinComment

SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT OF AGENCY 2015 CHIEF FOIA OFFICER REPORTS NOW AVAILABLE

By Office of Information Policy, July 22, 2015


Since 2010, agency Chief FOIA Officers have submitted to the Department of Justice an annual report detailing all of their agency’s efforts in implementing President Obama’s and Attorney General Holder’s FOIA Memoranda. These Chief FOIA Officer Reports have served as a valuable resource for agencies to describe the various initiatives undertaken to improve their administration of the FOIA.  With the completion of agencies’ 2015 Chief FOIA Officer Reports this past Sunshine Week, today OIP releases its summary and assessment of these reports and the progress made in implementing Attorney General Holder’s 2009 FOIA Guidelines.

Similar to last year, this year’s summary is broken down into five parts detailing the efforts of agencies in each of the five key areas from Attorney General Holder’s 2009 FOIA Guidelines:

Applying the Presumption of Openness,
Having Effective Systems for Responding to Requests,
Making Information Available Proactively,
Utilizing Technology, and
Reducing Backlogs and Improving Timeliness.

Read more here

FOIA News: Reaction to New FOIA Ombudsman James Holzer

FOIA News (2015-2025)Kevin SchmidtComment

Court opinions issued July 20, 2015

Court Opinions (2015-2024)Allan BlutsteinComment

B&P Co. v. Internal Revenue Serv. (S.D. Ohio) -- ruling that IRS properly withheld a draft Revenue Agent Report pursuant to Exemptions 3, 5, and 7(A), and that it performed an adequate search for requested restitution-related documents.    

Smith v. U.S. Dep't of Justice (D.D.C.) -- concluding that Drug Enforcement Administration performed an adequate search in response to plaintiff's request for records about himself; further finding that DEA properly refused to confirm or deny the existence of certain records pertaining to a third party who testified against plaintiff at criminal trial.

Summaries of all cases since April 2015 are available here.