Skip to content

FOIA Activity: 6 New Procedural or Substantive Decisions

by FOIA Project Staff on September 10th, 2021

We have added 6 decisions of a procedural or substantive nature filed between August 29, 2021 and September 4, 2021. These are associated with 6 FOIA cases pending in federal district court. Note that because there can be delays between the date a decision is made and when it shows up on PACER, this listing includes only decisions that appeared on PACER during this period.

Click on the date to view the full text of the decision. Click on a case title below to view other details for that case, including links to the docket report and complaint.

  1. CAE 2:2018cv00873Stanco et al v. Internal Revenue Service

    • September 1, 2021: ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 8/31/2021 DENYING [33] Motion to Dismiss. Defendant shall file a responsive pleading within twenty- one (21) days of the date of electronic filing date of this Order. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

    • September 2, 2021: MEMORANDUM OPINION re: [53] Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment and [54] Plaintiffs' Second Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. Please see the attached Memorandum Opinion for additional details. Signed by Judge Amit P. Mehta on 9/2/2021. (lcapm3)

    • September 3, 2021: MEMORANDUM OPINION denying [74] / 81 Plaintiff's motions for reconsideration; denying [75] Plaintiff's motion for sanctions; denying [78] Plaintiff's demand for evidence; denying [80] Plaintiff's motion for clarification; granting in part and denying in part [82] Plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment; denying [90] Plaintiff's motion to strike; granting in part and denying in part [71] Defendant's motion for summary judgment; and granting [89] Defendant's motion to amend its answer. See document for details. Signed by Judge Rudolph Contreras on 9/3/2021. (lcrc1)
  4. FLS 9:2020cv81351Teo v. United States Internal Revenue Service

    • September 3, 2021: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re [52] Report and Recommendations; Granting [21] Motion for Summary Judgment Signed by Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks on 9/3/2021. See attached document for full details. (ail)
  5. OHS 3:2021cv00218Esrati v. U.S. Department of Justice et al

    • September 1, 2021: NOTICE – 1. Parties are not permitted to have ex-parte communications with the Court. This means that you cannot communicate with the Court about the merits of your case, orally or in writing, without the other partys participation. 2. You must tel l the Court and the other partys attorney, in writing, of changes to your address and/or telephone number. 3. Because pro se litigants do not have access to the Courts electronic filing system, they are required to mail a copy of anything they file w ith the Court to the other party's attorney and enclose a signed Certificate of Service. This requirement can be avoided if: (1) the pro se litigant personally brings the filing to the Clerk of Courts office for filing; (2) the attorney(s) for t he other party agree to receive service solely through the Court's CM/ECF filing system; and (3) the Certificate of Service in the pro se litigants filing states that service will be made solely through the Courts CM/ECF filing system and couns el for the opposing party has so consented. 4. Pro se litigants are encouraged to read the Court's Guide for Pro Se Civil Litigants, which can be found at Signed by Judge Michael J. Newman on 8/31/21. (pb)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
  6. WAW 2:2019cv00645National Parks Conservation Association v. US Department of the Navy

    • August 31, 2021: MINUTE ORDER: The parties are DIRECTED to meet and confer and to file a Joint Status Report within twenty-eight (28) days of the date of this Minute Order addressing: (i) the status of the deferred portions of the parties' cross-motions, docke t nos. [27] & [32] , with respect to the DCAST/SHARP materials; (ii) the expected date of a renewed DCRIT decision about the 77 PDARS records; (iii) whether the stay of this matter should remain in place or be lifted; and (iv) if the case remains stayed, whether the parties should be required to periodically file Joint Status Reports and on what timing. Authorized by Judge Thomas S. Zilly. (MW)

From → Decisions, FOIA, PACER

No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Note: XHTML is allowed. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS

Skip to toolbar