Niskanen Ctr. v. U.S. Dep't of Energy (D.D.C.) -- concluding that: (1) agency failed to perform reasonable search for records concerning federal advisory committee, namely National Coal Coalition or its incorporated counterpart NCC, Inc.; and (2) agency improperly withhold certain records pursuant to Exemption 4, because they were obtained involuntarily (contrary to agency’s claim) and agency failed to show that disclosure would likely cause substantial competitive harm; and (3) further briefing was required to determine whether on document was privileged under Exemption 4.
Cause of Action Inst. v. DOJ (D.D.C.) -- deciding after in camera review that: (1) DOJ improperly relied on attorney-client and deliberative process privileges to withhold portion of email between White House and Office of Information and Privacy concerning House Committee’s directive to agencies to withhold congressional records; (2) DOJ properly relied on same privileges to withhold communications among three DOJ components and undisclosed federal agency about same subject; and (3) it was unnecessary to resolve parties’ disagreement as to whether FOIA Improvement Act of 2016 raised requirement for withholding records.
Prechdel v. FCC -- finding that: (1) agency properly relied on deliberative process privilege to withhold communications among agency staff regarding public inquiry about proposed “Restoring Internet Freedom” regulations; (2) agency improperly invoked Exemption 6 to withhold email addresses of email associated with “bulk comment” submissions; (3) .CSV files themselves also could not be protected by Exemption 6, and ordering parties to meet and confer about their availability; and (4) agency properly invoked Exemption 7(E) to withhold electronic server logs detailing all dates and times that .CSV files were submitted.
Summaries of all published opinions issued since April 2015 are available here.