Case Detail
Case Title | Miller v. Federal Elections Commission | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
District | Southern District of Ohio | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
City | Cincinnati | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Case Number | 1:2012cv00242 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Date Filed | 2012-03-26 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Date Closed | 2013-08-15 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Judge | Chief Judge Susan J. Dlott | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plaintiff | Mark W Miller | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Defendant | Federal Elections Commission | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Documents | Docket Complaint Complaint attachment 1 Complaint attachment 2 Complaint attachment 3 Complaint attachment 4 Complaint attachment 5 Complaint attachment 6 Complaint attachment 7 Complaint attachment 8 Opinion/Order [16] FOIA Project Annotation: A federal court in Ohio has ruled that Mark Miller must exhaust his administrative remedies before he can amend his complaint in his FOIA suit against the FEC. Miller asked for an advisory opinion sent to the Schmidt for Congress Committee. Because of staff vacancies, the agency failed to respond to Miller's request within 20 days. Although Miller alleged that he filed an administrative appeal by email, the agency could find no record of receiving the appeal and was unaware of its existence until Miller filed suit alleging that the agency had failed to respond to his request within the statutory deadline. The agency disclosed a redacted version of the opinion and argued to the court that Miller's case was moot since he had received a response. Miller argued that his suit was not moot because the issue of the application of exemptions and an award of attorney's had not yet been addressed. The court, however, agreed with the agency, noting that "federal courts require a person who submitted a FOIA request to exhaust administrative remedies when the agency responded to the request in an untimely manner, but before a lawsuit was initiated. The Court believes that the same standard should apply here when the FEC responded to [Miller's request] after Miller initiated this suit. Miller first should appeal administratively to the FEC its decision to redact and withhold certain responsive documents pursuant to statutory exemptions." The court dismissed Miller's claim for attorney's fees, indicating that he was required to file a separate motion on that issue. The court observed that "Miller faces a difficult challenge to prove that he substantially prevailed in this case. The evidence here indicates that the FEC was preparing a response to [his] FOIA request prior to the initiation of the lawsuit."
Issues: Litigation - Jurisdiction - Failure to Exhaust | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
User-contributed Documents | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Docket Events (Hide) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|