Case Detail

FOIA Project Annotation: Ruling in a case brought by journalist Barton Gellman for records from various intelligence agencies about himself, Judge Christopher Cooper has found that with occasional exceptions most of the agencies' properly processed Gellman's requests. Gellman covered the classified information leaks of former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden for the Washington Post and is in the process of writing a book about Snowden. As part of his research, Gellman submitted nine requests to various intelligence agencies for records that mentioned his name. One of the most interesting issues that came out of the way in which Gellman framed his request was an unnecessarily complex discursion in to what constitutes a record as the agencies scrambled to dissect email chains that often mentioned Gellman in one segment but were not otherwise about him in a broader sense into multiple records to avoid running afoul of the D.C. Circuit's decision in American Immigration Lawyers Association v. Executive Office for Immigration Review (AILA), 830 F.3d 667 (D.C. Cir. 2016), in which the D.C. Circuit held that agencies could not withhold records based on their assertion that they were non-responsive to the request, but, instead, could only withhold records based on a FOIA exemption. The AILA decision recognized that trying to separate out non-responsive records from other portions of responsive records would require agencies to reconsider and recast what constituted an agency record. Whereas previous to AILA, entire documents would normally be considered the agency record responsive to a request, to avoid running afoul of its holding prohibiting agencies from withholding records merely because they were considered non-responsive, after AILA, agencies have been forced to become more creative. Nowhere is that more apparent than in how to treat email chains that are frequently made up a conglomeration of non-responsive and responsive records. In Gellman's case, the Department of Justice's Office of Information Policy had divided email chains into three discrete groups �" (1) multiple emails on disparate topics, only some of which pertained to Gellman, (2) emails to or from Gellman himself, which OIP claimed were expressly excluded from the scope of his FOIA request, and (3) compilations of press articles on disparate topics, where only some articles pertained to Gellman. Cooper started with an exploration of what is a record and who decides. He pointed out that "as with all other aspects of FOIA, the agency first decides, and it is then the court's job to determine if the agency's explanation for its decision is reasonable. The agency defines the scope of the record when it begins to process a particular request. And it cannot flip its position on the scope of a record mid-litigation. Once an agency defines the scope of what constitutes a record, it must abide by that definition and may not make 'non-responsive' redactions within the record. If the agency is consistent from the start, the court must then determine whether the definition of the record was reasonable under the circumstances." He indicated that "the D.C. Circuit has set some broad guideposts for determining whether an agency has reasonably defined the contours of a record. First, it has directed agencies and courts to OIP's guidance on this question. Second, the Circuit has 'set a minimum bar for what cannot reasonably be considered a discrete, non-responsive record,' namely 'a single (or perhaps a few) sentences within an otherwise responsive paragraph.'" Turning to an examination of how OIP had separated the emails into individual records, Cooper noted that "the agency withheld all unique emails that it deemed non-responsive, including by redacting any non-responsive emails that appear on the same page as responsive ones. Gellman objects to that approach. He would have the Court hold than an agency may never break up email chains to define individual emails as records. But that is not the law." He pointed out that "because agencies 'in effect define a "record" when they undertake the process of identifying records that are responsive to a request,' the agency is not locked into defining the scope of a record according to the form in which the records are collected. Defining the scope of a record occurs after the initial collection of potentially responsive records, not before. True, how a record is stored by the agency can be a factor in determining whether the agency's definition of a record is reasonable. But the mere fact that there is a single document with a single stamp [for court identification purposes] for multiple emails does not alone mean that the agency has defined the entire page as a single record." Gellman argued that "defining individual emails within a chain as distinct records is unreasonable in general because email chains are 'commonly understood to operate as a singe record.'" Cooper replied by noting that "that is indeed how email chains are most commonly understood. . .But, while it may usually be true that email replies reflect a natural progression of conversation on a unified topic, it is not always true. There are some circumstances where a single email chain contains discussion of unrelated topics that may reasonably be delineated into individual records, especially in light of a particular FOIA request." As an example, Cooper pointed to an email chain that mentioned Gellman but whose main body dealt with an article in Foreign Policy about then Attorney General Eric Holder. OIP disclosed the portion mentioning Gellman but separated out the rest of the email chain because it was non-responsive. Cooper agreed, noting that "read in that light, it was reasonable for OIP to decide, while processing this FOIA request, that each individual email constituted a record." The government also withheld records under Exemption 1 (national security) and Exemption 3 (other statutes). Cooper approved of claims from the Office of the National Director of Intelligence for seven of eight categories withheld under Exemption 1, but questioned ONDI's claim that responding to press inquiries qualified as an intelligence method. He declined Gellman's suggestion that he review the documents in camera, ordering the agency to either disclose non-exempt information or supplement its affidavits to justify its exemption claim. OIP also withheld on behalf of ONDI copyrighted bulletins summarizing intelligence news reports that were prepared by a contractor for distribution to ONDI staff under Exemption 4 (confidential business information). Gellman argued that the bulletins were neither confidential nor commercial. Cooper accepted the claim, pointing out that "ODNI presumably awarded the vendor its contract, in some part at least, because of how it formats, designs, and organizes its product. While not exactly the crown jewels, if competitors had access to that copyrighted information, it could implicate the vendor's commercial interest in maintaining the contract." Gellman argued that even though the format itself might be protected, the substance of the news reports was not itself confidential. As a result, Cooper ordered the agency to provide the substance of the articles. Addressing OIP's Exemption 5 claims, Cooper, like other D.C. Circuit district court judges, agreed with the agency that discussions of how to respond to press inquiries could be protected by the deliberative process privilege. Gellman argued that since DOJ had a press policy, discussions related to responding to the press did not qualify as deliberative. Cooper disagreed, noting that "but a general press policy does not strip an agency's ability to deliberate about how to respond to specific press inquiries without losing the protection of the deliberative process privilege." He observed that "formulating responses to specific press inquiries is not simply explaining and applying a general policy of how to do so; those discussions contain actual deliberation related to the agency's public positions."
Issues: Exemption 4 - Confidential business information, Agency Record, Exemption 5 - Privileges - Deliberative process privilege - Deliberative, Exemption 1 - Harm to national security

FOIA Project Annotation: Judge Christopher Cooper has ruled that the intelligence community agencies have now shown that they properly responded to journalist Barton Gellman's request for records about himself and withheld records under Exemption 5 (privileges). In a previous opinion in March 2020, Cooper told the agencies to explain a number of redactions. Cooper found that redactions made in an email chain created by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence were protected by the deliberative process privilege. Gellman argued that the agency had failed to show that the contents of the email had not been adopted as the final decision of the agency. But Cooper pointed out that "the Court disagrees. To reiterate, the plaintiff bears the burden to show evidence, beyond a mere 'speculation,' that a document has been adopted and thus lost its predecisional status. Here, Gellman has provided no non-speculative reason to believe the redacted language in ODNI Document 42 was later adopted as agency policy." He noted that "but it does not follow that all assertions of the deliberative process privilege, including those that do not relate to 'draft' documents, must be accompanied by an affirmative statement of non-adoption." The Justice Department's Office of Information Policy withheld records because they were draft statements. Gellman challenged an email sent from a public affairs officer at the National Security Agency concerning an article that had appeared in the Washington Post, arguing the email had been adopted as the agency's public statement. But Cooper observed that "it does not appear that [NSA public affairs officer Andrew Ames] was the final decisionmaker on what the NSA would tell the Post, and the record does not indicate whether the NSA ultimately adopted the redacted draft statement or otherwise used the statement in its response. The Court cannot say it was unreasonable for OIP to conclude that Mr. Ames's email was a mere predecisional recommendation without obvious markers of adoption." Rejecting Gellman's attempts to undermine OIP's claim that drafts were protected by the deliberative process privilege, Cooper pointed out that "Gellman misconstrues the case law on waiver of the deliberative process privilege. A document that makes recommendations to a senor agency official in anticipation of an engagement with journalists does not lose its privileged status simply because the official uses the documents as intended and follows some of its recommendations. Subjecting all such deliberative documents to disclosure would interfere with the 'ability of government employees to be candid when deliberating how to respond to the press.' Therefore, courts in this district generally allow agencies to withhold their internal deliberations about press statements, unless the agency subsequently made a public statement that 'replicated' the text of the deliberative document."
Issues: Exemption 5 - Privileges - Deliberative process privilege - Predecisional, Exemption 5 - Privileges - Deliberative process privilege - Deliberative

Date Filed	Doc #	Docket Text
2016-04-04	1	COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0090-4471461) filed by BARTON GELLMAN. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H, # 9 Exhibit I, # 10 Civil Cover Sheet, # 11 Summons to U.S. Attorney General, # 12 Summons to Department of Homeland Security, # 13 Summons to Department of Justice, # 14 Summons to Office of the Director of National Intelligence, # 15 Summons to U.S. Attorney)(Townsend, KatieLynn) (Entered: 04/04/2016)
2016-04-04		Case Assigned to Judge Christopher R. Cooper. (jd) (Entered: 04/05/2016)
2016-04-05	2	SUMMONS (5) Issued Electronically as to DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (Attachment: # 1 Consent Forms)(jd) (Entered: 04/05/2016)
2016-04-15	3	RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed on United States Attorney General. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney General 4/11/2016. (Townsend, KatieLynn) (Entered: 04/15/2016)
2016-04-15	4	RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed as to the United States Attorney. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney on 4/11/2016. Answer due for ALL FEDERAL DEFENDANTS by 5/11/2016. (Townsend, KatieLynn) (Entered: 04/15/2016)
2016-04-15	5	RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY served on 4/8/2016 (Townsend, KatieLynn) (Entered: 04/15/2016)
2016-04-15	6	RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE served on 4/11/2016 (Townsend, KatieLynn) (Entered: 04/15/2016)
2016-04-15	7	RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE served on 4/11/2016 (Townsend, KatieLynn) (Entered: 04/15/2016)
2016-04-22	8	NOTICE of Appearance by Claire M. Whitaker on behalf of DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE (Whitaker, Claire) (Entered: 04/22/2016)
2016-05-09	9	Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer (to June 10, 2016) by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Whitaker, Claire) (Entered: 05/09/2016)
2016-05-10	10	NOTICE of Appearance by Brian J. Field on behalf of All Defendants (Field, Brian) (Entered: 05/10/2016)
2016-05-11		MINUTE ORDER granting 9 Defendants' Consent Motion for Extension of Time to Answer: It is hereby ORDERED that Defendants shall have up to and including June 10, 2016 to file an answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint in this case. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 5/11/2016. (lccrc3) (Entered: 05/11/2016)
2016-05-12		Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendants shall have up to and including 6/10/2016 to file an answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint. (kt) (Entered: 05/12/2016)
2016-06-09	11	Joint MOTION for Scheduling Order by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Field, Brian) (Entered: 06/09/2016)
2016-06-09	12	ORDER granting 11 Joint Motion for Scheduling Order. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 6/9/2016. (lccrc3) (Entered: 06/09/2016)
2016-06-21	13	NOTICE of Appearance by Adam Alexander Marshall on behalf of BARTON GELLMAN (Marshall, Adam) (Entered: 06/21/2016)
2016-09-21	14	Joint STATUS REPORT by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE. (Field, Brian) (Entered: 09/21/2016)
2016-11-21	15	Joint STATUS REPORT by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE. (Field, Brian) (Entered: 11/21/2016)
2017-01-23	16	Joint STATUS REPORT by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE. (Field, Brian) (Entered: 01/23/2017)
2017-03-22	17	Joint STATUS REPORT by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE. (Field, Brian) (Entered: 03/22/2017)
2017-05-22	18	Joint STATUS REPORT by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE. (Field, Brian) (Entered: 05/22/2017)
2017-07-24	19	Joint STATUS REPORT by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE. (Field, Brian) (Entered: 07/24/2017)
2017-09-22	20	Joint STATUS REPORT by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE. (Field, Brian) (Entered: 09/22/2017)
2017-11-21	21	Joint STATUS REPORT by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE. (Field, Brian) (Entered: 11/21/2017)
2018-01-19	22	Joint STATUS REPORT by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE. (Field, Brian) (Entered: 01/19/2018)
2018-03-20	23	Joint STATUS REPORT by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE. (Field, Brian) (Entered: 03/20/2018)
2018-05-16	24	Joint STATUS REPORT by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE. (Field, Brian) (Entered: 05/16/2018)
2018-05-17	25	ORDER directing the parties to file a joint status report by June 4, 2018. See full Order for details. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 5/17/2018. (lccrc3) (Entered: 05/17/2018)
2018-05-17		Set/Reset Deadlines: Joint Status Report due by 6/4/2018 (lsj) (Entered: 05/17/2018)
2018-06-04	26	Joint STATUS REPORT by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE. (Field, Brian) (Entered: 06/04/2018)
2018-06-07	27	ORDER re next status report and briefing schedule. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 6/7/2018. (lccrc3) (Entered: 06/07/2018)
2018-06-08		Set/Reset Deadlines: Joint Status Report due by 6/29/2018 (lsj) (Entered: 06/08/2018)
2018-06-29	28	Joint STATUS REPORT by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE. (Field, Brian) (Entered: 06/29/2018)
2018-07-26	29	VACATED PURSUANT TO MINUTE ORDER ENTERED 9/11/2018.....Order setting summary judgment briefing schedule. See full Order for details. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 7/26/2018. (lccrc3) Modified on 9/12/2018 (zlsj). (Entered: 07/26/2018)
2018-07-26		Set/Reset Deadlines: Summary Judgment motions due by 9/21/2018. Response to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 10/23/2018. Reply to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 12/7/2018. Plaintiff's Replies due by 12/21/2018. (lsj) (Entered: 07/26/2018)
2018-09-11	30	Consent MOTION for Briefing Schedule Modification by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE (Field, Brian) (Entered: 09/11/2018)
2018-09-11		VACATED PURSUANT TO MINUTE ORDER ENTERED 10/17/2018.....MINUTE ORDER granting 30 Defendants' Motion to Modify Briefing Schedule and vacating the briefing schedule entered on 7/26/2018. The parties shall adhere to the briefing schedule as follows: Defendants' motion for summary judgment shall be due by October 23, 2018; Plaintiff's opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment shall be due by November 30, 2018; Defendants' reply and opposition shall be due by January 7, 2019; Plaintiff's reply shall be due by January 25, 2019. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 09/11/2018. (lccrc3) Modified on 10/17/2018 (zlsj). (Entered: 09/11/2018)
2018-09-12		Set/Reset Deadlines: Summary Judgment motions due by 10/23/2018. Response to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 11/30/2018. Reply to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 1/7/2019. Replies due by 1/25/2019. (lsj) (Entered: 09/12/2018)
2018-10-05	31	NOTICE of Change of Address by KatieLynn Boyd Townsend (Townsend, KatieLynn) (Entered: 10/05/2018)
2018-10-16	32	Consent MOTION to Modify Briefing Schedule by One Week by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE (Field, Brian) (Entered: 10/16/2018)
2018-10-17		VACATED PURSUANT TO MINUTE ORDER ENTERED 10/29/2018.....MINUTE ORDER granting Defendants' 32 Motion to Modify Briefing Schedule and vacating the briefing schedule entered on 9/11/2018. The parties shall adhere to a briefing schedule as follows: Defendants shall file their motion for summary judgment on or before October 30, 2018; Plaintiff shall file his opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment on or before December 7, 2018; Defendants shall file their reply and opposition on or before January 14, 2019; Plaintiff shall file his reply on or before February 1, 2019. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 10/17/2018. (lccrc3) Modified on 10/30/2018 (zlsj). (Entered: 10/17/2018)
2018-10-17		Set/Reset Deadlines: Summary Judgment motions due by 10/30/2018. Response to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 12/7/2018. Reply to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 1/14/2019. Plaintiff's Reply due by 2/1/2019. (lsj) (Entered: 10/17/2018)
2018-10-25	33	Consent MOTION to Modify Briefing Schedule by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE (Field, Brian) Modified on 10/26/2018 to correct docket event (jf). (Entered: 10/25/2018)
2018-10-29		VACATED PURSUANT TO MINUTE ORDER ENTERED 11/29/18.....MINUTE ORDER granting 33 Motion to Modify Briefing Schedule and vacating the schedule entered on 10/17/2018. The parties shall adhere to a briefing schedule as follows: Defendants shall file their motion for summary judgment on or before November 30, 2018; Plaintiff shall file his opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment on or before January 7, 2019; Defendants shall file their reply and opposition on or before February 14, 2019; Plaintiff shall file his reply on or before March 1, 2019. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 10/29/2018. (lccrc3) Modified on 11/30/2018 (zlsj). (Entered: 10/29/2018)
2018-10-30		Set/Reset Deadlines: Summary Judgment motions due by 10/30/2018. Response to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 1/7/2019. Reply to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 2/14/2019. Plaintiff's Reply due by 3/1/2019. (lsj) (Entered: 10/30/2018)
2018-11-28	34	Consent MOTION to Modify Briefing Schedule Modification by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE (Field, Brian) Modified event on 11/29/2018 (ztd). (Entered: 11/28/2018)
2018-11-29		MINUTE ORDER granting 34 Defendants' Motion to Modify Briefing Schedule and vacating the briefing schedule entered on 10/29/2018. The parties shall adhere to the following briefing schedule: Defendants shall file their motion for summary judgment on or before January 30, 2019; Plaintiff shall file his opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment on or before March 7, 2019; Defendants shall file their reply and opposition on or before April 15, 2019; Plaintiff shall file his reply on or before May 3, 2019. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 11/29/2018. (lccrc3) (Entered: 11/29/2018)
2018-11-30		Set/Reset Deadlines: Summary Judgment motions due by 1/30/2019. Response to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 3/7/2019. Reply to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 4/15/2019. Replies due by 5/3/2019. (lsj) (Entered: 11/30/2018)
2019-01-29	35	Unopposed MOTION for Briefing Schedule Modification by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE (Field, Brian) (Entered: 01/29/2019)
2019-01-30		VACATED PURSUANT TO MINUTE ORDER ENTERED 4/2/19.....MINUTE ORDER granting 35 Motion for Briefing Schedule Modification and vacating the schedule entered on November 29, 2018. The parties shall adhere to the following briefing schedule: Defendants shall file their motion for summary judgment on or before April 1, 2019; Plaintiff shall file his opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment on or before May 14, 2019; Defendants shall file their reply and opposition on or before June 14, 2019; Plaintiff shall file his reply on or before July 15, 2019. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 01/30/2019. (lccrc3) Modified on 4/2/2019 (zlsj). (Entered: 01/30/2019)
2019-01-30		Set/Reset Deadlines: Summary Judgment motions due by 4/1/2019. Response to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 5/14/2019. Reply to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 6/14/2019. Replies due by 7/15/2019. (znbn) (Entered: 01/30/2019)
2019-04-01	36	Consent MOTION to Modify Briefing Schedule by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE (Field, Brian) (Entered: 04/01/2019)
2019-04-02		MINUTE ORDER granting 36 Motion for Briefing Schedule Modification and vacating the schedule entered on January 30, 2019. The parties shall adhere to the following briefing schedule: Defendants shall file their motion for summary judgment on or before April 3, 2019; Plaintiff shall file his opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment on or before May 16, 2019; Defendants shall file their reply and opposition on or before June 17, 2019; Plaintiff shall file his reply on or before July 17, 2019. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 04/02/2019. (lccrc3) (Entered: 04/02/2019)
2019-04-02		Set/Reset Deadlines: Summary Judgment motions due by 4/3/2019. Response to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 5/16/2019. Reply to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 6/17/2019.Replies due by 7/17/2019. (lsj) (Entered: 04/02/2019)
2019-04-03	37	MOTION for Summary Judgment by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Statement of Facts, # 3 Exhibit Ex. A (Holzer Decl.), # 4 Exhibit Ex. B (Hardy Decl.), # 5 Exhibit Ex. C (Brinkmann Decl.), # 6 Exhibit Ex. D (Findlay Decl.), # 7 Exhibit Ex. E (Gaviria Decl.), # 8 Exhibit Ex. F (Henry Decl.), # 9 Exhibit Ex. G (Miller Decl.), # 10 Exhibit Ex. H (Brodfuehrer Decl.), # 11 Exhibit Ex. I (Kiyosaki Decl.), # 12 Exhibit Ex. J (Howard Decl.), # 13 Text of Proposed Order)(Field, Brian) (Entered: 04/03/2019)
2019-04-03	38	MOTION for Leave to File Declarations Under Seal and Ex Parte, In Camera by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE (Field, Brian) (Entered: 04/03/2019)
2019-04-04		MINUTE ORDER granting 38 Motion for Leave to File Declarations Under Seal and Ex Parte, In Camera . The Court will reserve judgment on Plaintiff's request for public filing of redacted versions of the declarations until it has reviewed them and, if necessary, received briefing on the request. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 04/04/2019. (lccrc3) (Entered: 04/04/2019)
2019-04-08		MINUTE ORDER: The Court has reviewed the ex parte, in camera, classified declarations submitted in support of Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. See ECF No. 38 and April 4, 2019 Minute Order. The D.C. Circuit has instructed that a court considering in camera declarations "should be certain to make the public record as complete as possible." Lykins v. United States Dep't of Justice , 725 F.2d 1455, 1465 (D.C. Cir. 1984). Upon review, the Court hereby ORDERS Defendants to file on the public docket a redacted, unclassified version of the declaration provided in camera by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Defendants need not file a redacted version of the declaration provided in camera by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 04/08/2019. (lccrc3) (Entered: 04/08/2019)
2019-05-02	39	NOTICE by DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE re Order,,, (Attachments: # 1 Declaration Redacted Decl. of D. Hardy)(Field, Brian) (Entered: 05/02/2019)
2019-05-03	40	Consent MOTION to Modify Briefing Schedule on Motions for Summary Judgment by BARTON GELLMAN (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Townsend, KatieLynn) (Entered: 05/03/2019)
2019-05-07		MINUTE ORDER granting 40 Motion to Modify Briefing Schedule and vacating the briefing schedule entered on April 2, 2019. The Plaintiff shall file his opposition to Defendants' motion for summary judgment and cross-motion for summary judgment on or before May 31, 2019; Defendants shall file their reply and opposition on or before July 1, 2019; Plaintiff shall file his reply on or before July 26, 2019. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 05/07/2019. (lccrc3) (Entered: 05/07/2019)
2019-05-07		Set/Reset Deadlines: Response to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 5/31/2019. Cross Motions due by 5/31/2019. Reply to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 7/1/2019. Response to Cross Motions due by 7/1/2019. Reply to Cross Motions due by 7/26/2019. (znbn) (Entered: 05/07/2019)
2019-05-31	41	Cross MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment by BARTON GELLMAN (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Statement of Facts, # 3 Declaration of Katie Townsend, # 4 Declaration of Barton Gellman, # 5 Declaration of Gunita Singh, # 6 Text of Proposed Order)(Townsend, KatieLynn) (Entered: 05/31/2019)
2019-05-31	42	MOTION for In Camera Review by BARTON GELLMAN (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(Townsend, KatieLynn) (Entered: 05/31/2019)
2019-05-31	43	Memorandum in opposition to re 37 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by BARTON GELLMAN. (ztd); (See docket entry no. 41 to view.) (Entered: 06/03/2019)
2019-06-06	44	Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 42 MOTION for In Camera Review by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE (Field, Brian) (Entered: 06/06/2019)
2019-06-06		VACATED PURSUANT MINUTE ORDER ENTERED 6/21/2019.....MINUTE ORDER granting 44 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response. Defendants shall respond to Plaintiff's 42 Motion for In Camera Review on or before July 1, 2019. Plaintiff shall reply on or before July 26, 2019. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 06/06/2019. (lccrc3) Modified on 6/21/2019 (lsj). (Entered: 06/06/2019)
2019-06-07		Set/Reset Deadlines: Responses due by 7/1/2019 Replies due by 7/26/2019. (lsj) (Entered: 06/07/2019)
2019-06-18	45	Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE (Field, Brian) (Entered: 06/18/2019)
2019-06-21		MINUTE ORDER granting 45 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply and vacating the briefing schedule entered on May 7, 2019. Defendants shall file their combined reply and opposition to Plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment and motion for in camera review on or before July 24, 2019. Plaintiff shall file his reply in support of his cross-motion for summary judgment and reply in support of his motion for in camera review on or before August 16, 2019. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 6/21/2019. (lccrc3) (Entered: 06/21/2019)
2019-06-21		MINUTE ORDER: Pursuant to the Minute Order issued earlier today, the briefing schedule entered on June 6, 2019 is hereby VACATED. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 06/21/2019. (lccrc3) (Entered: 06/21/2019)
2019-06-21		Set/Reset Deadlines: Reply to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 7/24/2019. Replies due by 8/16/2019. (lsj) (Entered: 06/21/2019)
2019-07-22	46	Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE (Field, Brian) (Entered: 07/22/2019)
2019-07-23		MINUTE ORDER granting 46 Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply and vacating the briefing schedule entered on June 21, 2019. Defendants shall file their combined reply and opposition to Plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment and motion for in camera review on or before July 25, 2019. Plaintiff shall file his reply in support of his cross-motion for summary judgment and reply in support of his motion for in camera review on or before August 19, 2019. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 07/23/2019. (lccrc3) (Entered: 07/23/2019)
2019-07-24		Set/Reset Deadlines: Reply to Cross Motions due by 7/25/2019. Replies due by 8/19/2019. (lsj) (Entered: 07/24/2019)
2019-07-25	47	REPLY to opposition to motion re 37 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE. (Attachments: # 1 Statement of Facts, # 2 Declaration 4th Hardy Decl., # 3 Declaration Tiernan Decl., # 4 Declaration Supp. Brinkmann Decl.)(Field, Brian) (Entered: 07/25/2019)
2019-07-25	48	Memorandum in opposition to re 41 Cross MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment , 42 MOTION for In Camera Review filed by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE. (Attachments: # 1 Statement of Facts, # 2 Declaration 4th Hardy Decl., # 3 Declaration Tiernan Decl., # 4 Declaration Supp. Brinkmann Decl., # 5 Text of Proposed Order)(Field, Brian) (Entered: 07/25/2019)
2019-08-19	49	REPLY to opposition to motion re 42 MOTION for In Camera Review , 41 Cross MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment filed by BARTON GELLMAN. (Attachments: # 1 Supplemental Declaration of Katie Townsend)(Townsend, KatieLynn) (Entered: 08/19/2019)
2020-02-05		MINUTE ORDER: Parties are hereby ORDERED to appear for a hearing on Defendants' 37 MOTION for Summary Judgment and Plaintiff's 41 Cross-MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment on Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 27A. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 02/05/2020. (lccrc3) (Entered: 02/05/2020)
2020-02-05		Set/Reset Hearings: Motion Hearing set for 2/26/2020 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 27A before Judge Christopher R. Cooper. (lsj) (Entered: 02/05/2020)
2020-02-19		MINUTE ORDER: While the Court will not limit the scope of the parties' arguments at the upcoming hearing, they should be prepared to address the following topics in particular: (1) the application of Exemption 4 to third-party press clippings; (2) the application of the deliberative process privilege to emails about responding to the press and emails reacting to news articles; and (3) the definition of "a record" under FOIA. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 02/19/2020. (lccrc3) (Entered: 02/19/2020)
2020-02-26		Minute Entry for Motion Hearing held before Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 2/26/2020. Oral arguments submitted on Defendant's Motion 37 for Summary Judgment and Plaintiff's Cross Motion 41 for Partial Summary Judgment. Motions taken under advisement; forthcoming Order. (Court Reporter: Lisa Moreira) (lsj) (Entered: 02/26/2020)
2020-03-10	50	NOTICE by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE (Field, Brian) (Entered: 03/10/2020)
2020-03-20	51	ORDER granting in part/denying in part 37 Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, granting in part/denying in part 41 Plaintiff's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment, and denying 42 Plaintiff's Motion for In Camera Review. See full Order for details. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 03/20/2020. (lccrc3) (Entered: 03/20/2020)
2020-03-20	52	MEMORANDUM OPINION re: 51 Order. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 03/20/2020. (lccrc3) (Entered: 03/20/2020)
2020-03-24	53	TRANSCRIPT OF MOTION HEARING before Judge Christopher R. Cooper held on February 26, 2020; Page Numbers: 1-82. Date of Issuance:March 24, 2020. Court Reporter/Transcriber Lisa A. Moreira, RDR, CRR, Telephone number (202) 354-3187, Transcripts may be ordered by submitting the Transcript Order Form For the first 90 days after this filing date, the transcript may be viewed at the courthouse at a public terminal or purchased from t he court reporter referenced above. After 90 days, the transcript may be accessed via PACER. Other transcript formats, (multi-page, condensed, CD or ASCII) may be purchased from the court reporter. NOTICE RE REDACTION OF TRANSCRIPTS: The parties have twenty-one days to file with the court and the court reporter any request to redact personal identifiers from this transcript. If no such requests are filed, the transcript will be made available to the public via PACER without redaction after 90 days. The policy, which includes the five personal identifiers specifically covered, is located on our website at www.dcd.uscourts.gov. Redaction Request due 4/14/2020. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 4/24/2020. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 6/22/2020.(Moreira, Lisa) (Entered: 03/24/2020)
2020-04-21	54	Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to file renewed summary judgment motion by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE (Field, Brian) (Entered: 04/21/2020)
2020-04-21		MINUTE ORDER granting Defendants' 54 Motion for Extension of Time to File their Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment. It is hereby ORDERED that Defendants' shall file their renewed motion for summary judgment on or before June 4, 2020. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 04/21/2020. (lccrc3) (Entered: 04/21/2020)
2020-04-23		Set/Reset Deadlines: Renewed Summary Judgment motions due by 6/4/2020. (lsj) (Entered: 04/23/2020)
2020-05-28	55	Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to file renewed summary judgment motion by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE (Field, Brian) Modified on 5/29/2020 (ztd). (Entered: 05/28/2020)
2020-05-29		MINUTE ORDER granting defendants' 55 Motion for Extension of Time to File its Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment. The parties are hereby ORDERED to adhere to the following briefing schedule: Defendants' renewed motion for summary judgment shall be filed by June 25, 2020; Plaintiff's opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment shall be filed by July 24, 2020; Defendants' opposition and reply shall be filed by August 14, 2020; and Plaintiff's reply shall be filed by August 28, 2020. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 05/29/2020. (lccrc3) (Entered: 05/29/2020)
2020-05-29		Set/Reset Deadlines:. Summary Judgment motions due by 6/25/2020. Response to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 7/24/2020. Reply to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 8/14/2020. Replies due by 8/28/2020 (lsj) (Entered: 05/29/2020)
2020-06-24	56	Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to file renewed summary judgment motion by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE (Field, Brian) Modified on 6/24/2020 (ztd). (Entered: 06/24/2020)
2020-06-25		MINUTE ORDER granting Defendants' 56 Motion for Extension of Time to File its Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment. It is hereby ORDERED that all briefing deadlines are extended by three business days. Accordingly, the parties shall adhere to the following schedule: Defendants' renewed motion for summary judgment shall be filed by June 30, 2020; Plaintiff's opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment shall be filed by July 29, 2020; Defendants' opposition and reply shall be filed by August 19, 2020; and Plaintiff's reply shall be filed by September 2, 2020. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 06/25/2020. (lccrc3) (Entered: 06/25/2020)
2020-06-25		Set/Reset Deadlines: Summary Judgment motions due by 6/30/2020. Response to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 7/29/2020. Reply to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 8/19/2020. Replies due by 9/2/2020. (lsj) (Entered: 06/25/2020)
2020-06-30	57	MOTION for Summary Judgment by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Statement of Facts, # 3 Exhibit A (Koch Decl.), # 4 Exhibit B (Supp. Kiyosaki Decl.), # 5 Exhibit C (3d Brinkmann Decl.), # 6 Exhibit D (Tiernan Decl.))(Field, Brian) (Entered: 06/30/2020)
2020-07-29	58	Cross MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment by BARTON GELLMAN (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Statement of Facts, # 3 Second Declaration of Adam A. Marshall, # 4 Text of Proposed Order)(Townsend, KatieLynn) (Entered: 07/29/2020)
2020-07-29	59	RESPONSE re 57 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by BARTON GELLMAN. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Statement of Facts, # 3 Second Declaration of Adam A. Marshall, # 4 Text of Proposed Order)(Townsend, KatieLynn) (Entered: 07/29/2020)
2020-08-14	60	REPLY to opposition to motion re 57 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE. (Attachments: # 1 Statement of Facts)(Field, Brian) (Entered: 08/14/2020)
2020-08-14	61	Memorandum in opposition to re 58 Cross MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment filed by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE. (Attachments: # 1 Statement of Facts, # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(Field, Brian) (Entered: 08/14/2020)
2020-09-02	62	REPLY to opposition to motion re 58 Cross MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment filed by BARTON GELLMAN. (Townsend, KatieLynn) (Entered: 09/02/2020)
2020-09-02	63	NOTICE of Filing 4th Brinkmann Declaration by DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (Attachments: # 1 Declaration 4th Brinkmann Decl.)(Field, Brian) (Entered: 09/02/2020)
2020-09-11	64	Unopposed MOTION for Leave to File Surreply by BARTON GELLMAN (Attachments: # 1 Surreply)(Townsend, KatieLynn) (Entered: 09/11/2020)
2020-09-14		MINUTE ORDER granting 64 Motion for Leave to File Surreply. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 09/14/2020. (lccrc3) (Entered: 09/14/2020)
2020-09-14	65	SURREPLY to re 58 Cross MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment filed by BARTON GELLMAN. (ztd) (Entered: 09/24/2020)
2021-02-22	66	ORDER granting 57 Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 58 Plaintiff's Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 02/22/2021. (lccrc3) (Entered: 02/22/2021)
2021-02-22	67	MEMORANDUM OPINION re: 66 Order Granting 57 Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 58 Plaintiff's Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 02/22/2021. (lccrc3) (Entered: 02/22/2021)
Hide Docket Events