Feds for Freedom v. DOD (D.D.C.) — granting the agency’s motion for summary judgment and concluding that “it need not response to the request because its scope is so unreasonably expansive that processing and responding to it would be unduly burdensome”; taking note of an agency declaration that stated complying with the request would implicate “over 1.2 gigabytes of records,” including “over 2,000 emails, each with attachments,” totaling more than “26,000 pages”; noting further these records would require “the most scrutinous review,” or “about 6,500 hours of work.”; finally, concluding “that the breadth of Plaintiff’s request is unreasonable in light of Plaintiff’s asserted purpose” for seeking records, namely, to “protect employee rights by confronting the federal government’s mandates requiring vaccination for COVID-19.”
Wilson v. FBI (D.D.C.) — granting the agency’s motion for summary judgment and holding its “search was sufficient” and “invocation of FOIA exemptions . . . proper”; rejecting the requester’s argument that the agency improperly refused to employ desired search terms and to search in the FBI’s Electronic Surveillance and DELTA databases; with respect to Exemption 7(C), holding that the agency correctly withheld the names and identifying information of government investigators and third parties; with respect to Exemption 7(E), accepting the withholding of “an internal email address, non-public intranet addresses, and non-public phone numbers”; finally, holding that the agency’s use of Glomar was proper with respect to (1) national security and intelligence-related records protected by Exemptions 1 and 3, as well as records identifying individuals (2) in the witness security program, (3) on a watchlist, or (4) who are confidential sources.
Summaries of all published opinions issued in 2025 are available here. Earlier opinions are available for 2024 and from 2015 to 2023.