Skip to content

Case Detail

[Subscribe to updates]
Case TitleKhan v. National Security Agency et al
DistrictNorthern District of Illinois
Case Number1:2017cv08046
Date Filed2017-11-07
Date Closed2018-01-25
JudgeHonorable Edmond E. Chang
PlaintiffMohammad Waqas Khan
Case DescriptionMohammed Waqas Khan submitted a FOIA request to the National Security Agency for records concerning himself. The agency issued a Glomar response neither confirming nor denying the existence of records. Khan also submitted a FOIA request to the FBI for records concerning himself. The agency denied his request under Exemption 7(A) (interference with ongoing investigation or proceeding). Khan then filed suit against both agencies.
Complaint issues: Determination - Glomar response, Exemption 7(A) - Interference with ongoing investigation

DefendantNational Security Agency
DefendantFederal Bureau of Investigation
DefendantJohn Does X
DefendantJane Does X
User-contributed Documents
Docket Events (Hide)
Date FiledDoc #Docket Text

2017-11-071COMPLAINT filed by Mohammad Waqas Khan; (las, ) (Entered: 11/08/2017)
2017-11-072CIVIL Cover Sheet (las, ) (Entered: 11/08/2017)
2017-11-073PRO SE Appearance by Plaintiff Mohammad Waqas Khan (las, ) (Entered: 11/08/2017)
2017-11-135NOTICE TO THE PARTIES - The Court is participating in the Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot (MIDP). The key features and deadlines are set forth in the attached Notice which includes the MIDP Standing Order. Also attached is a checklist for use by the parties. In cases subject to the pilot, all parties must respond to the mandatory initial discovery requests set forth in the Standing Order before initiating any further discovery in this case. Please note: The discovery obligations in the Standing Order supersede the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1). Any party seeking affirmative relief must serve a copy of the attached documents (Notice to Parties and the Standing Order) on each new party when the Complaint, Counterclaim, Crossclaim, or Third-Party Complaint is served. (rp, ) (Entered: 11/13/2017)
2017-11-136MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Initial status hearing set for 01/09/2018 at 9:00 a.m. The parties must file a joint initial status report with the content described in the attached status report requirements at least 3 business days before the initial status hearing. Plaintiff must still file the report even if not all Defendants have been served or have responded to requests to craft a joint report. Because the Procedures are occasionally revised, counsel must read them anew even if counsel has appeared before Judge Chang in other cases. Emailed notice (Attachments: # 1 Status Report Requirements) (slb, ) (Entered: 11/13/2017)
2018-01-087MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: No status report has been filed as required by R. 6, including information on service of process. Nor does the docket reflect issuance of summons. The status report must be filed by 01/16/2018, or else the case will be dismissed for lack of prosecution. The status hearing of 01/09/2018 is reset to 020/2/2018 at 10:45 AM.Emailed notice (slb, ) (Entered: 01/08/2018)
2018-01-258MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: In the Order of 11/13/2017, Plaintiff was ordered to file a status report in advance of the 01/09/2018 status hearing, but none was filed In the Order of 01/08/2018, the Court reset the status report deadline to 01/16/2018, noted the lack of summons, and warned that the failure to file the status report would result in dismissal for lack of prosecution. No status report was filed, and still no summons has issued (let alone service of process). Under Rule 41(b), the case is dismissed with prejudice for lack of prosecution. A separate AO-450 judgment shall issue. Status hearing of 02/02/2018 is vacated. Civil case terminated. Emailed notice (slb, ) (Entered: 01/25/2018)
2018-01-259ENTERED JUDGMENT on 1/25/2018:Emailed notice(slb, ) (Entered: 01/25/2018)
Hide Docket Events
by FOIA Project Staff