Case Detail

FOIA Project Annotation: A federal court in New York has ruled that the Office of the Inspector General at the Department of Justice properly redacted information that could identify the subject of an OIG report dealing with a specific instance of sexual harassment in the workplace in response to a request from BuzzFeed, Inc. for an unredacted copy of the report. On July 21, 2020, the DOJ Office of the Inspector General posted on its website an investigative summary of a report entitled "Findings of Misconduct by a Former DOJ Executive Officer for Making Inappropriate Comments Constituting Sexual Harassment to a Subordinate on Three Occasions." That same day, BuzzFeed News made a FOIA request for the underlying report. On March 17, 2021, OIG provided the 15-page report to BuzzFeed with redactions made under Exemption 6 (invasion of privacy) and Exemption 7(C) (invasion of privacy concerning law enforcement records) redacting the identity of the subject, along with other identifying or personal information; certain dates, including the dates of the events at issue; the names of third-party individuals, including victims; the name of the non-supervisory agent involved in the OIG investigation; and information related to allegations against the subject that OIG did not substantiate. BuzzFeed filed an administrative appeal of the decision to redact the identity of the subject, the subject's office location, and the effective date of the subject's retirement, but its appeal was denied. BuzzFeed then filed suit. Judge John Koeltl explained that the Second Circuit's ruling in Perlman v. Dept of Justice, 312 F.3d 100 (2nd Cir. 2002) set out a five-factor test for determining the privacy interest for senior government officials accused of wrongdoing. Those factors included the government employee's rank, the degree of wrongdoing and strength of evidence against the employee, whether there are other ways to obtain the information, whether the information sheds light on a government activity, and whether the information sought is related to job function or is personal in nature. Koeltl proceeded to examine each factor. As to the individual's rank, Koeltl noted that "while the Subject did not hold a rank as high as the official in Perlman (Immigration and Naturalization Service general counsel), the Subject was a member of the DOJ's Senior Executive Service and was the most senior person in his office. The Subject's rank is comparable to that of other officials whose ranks courts found to favor disclosure. And while DOJ argues that the Subject's retirement prior to the release of the Report affects the consideration of this factor, courts have found that an official's high rank favors disclosure even if the official no longer serves in that position." On the factor of the degree of wrongdoing, Koeltl noted that "in this case, there is no evidence that the Subject's inappropriate conduct negatively impacted the entire office or anyone other than the people at whom the conduct was directed." He indicated that "any sexual harassment is unquestionably serious and the strength of the evidence against the Subject is strong. However, the misconduct here does not rise to the level of misconduct that other courts have found to favor disclosure of the employee's identity." The agency argued that the fact that the subject's identity was not available anywhere else was not applicable in this case. Koeltl disagreed, noting that "the court sees no reason why the type of information sought by the plaintiff should affect the applicability of this factor. Because it is undisputed that the Government is 'the only means for obtaining the desired information,' this factor favors disclosure." On whether disclosure would shed light on government activities, Koeltl observed that "in this case, the disclosure of the Report, without the identity of the Subject, sufficiently informs the public with respect to any impact that the Subject's misconduct had on government activity. The Report also discloses the facts necessary to assess the conduct of the investigation and the fact that the Subject retired during the investigation." On the issue of whether the information was related to job function or is personal in nature, Koeltl indicated that "the information sought in this case â€" the Subject's identity â€" is personal in nature. While the Subject's misconduct, including harassment in the workplace, plainly relates to the Subject's job function, the Government has already disclosed all the information in the Report that fairly can be said to shed light on government activity: namely, the extent of the Subject's wrongdoing, its effect on the Subject's agency, and the Government's investigation into the allegations against the Subject." After balancing the five factors, Koeltl concluded that the redactions were appropriate. He pointed out that "the Report, with the Subject's name redacted, already addresses the public's interest in knowing what their Government is up to: namely, what sort of misconduct occurred within DOJ and how that misconduct was investigated."
Issues: Adequacy - Search

Date Filed	Doc #	Docket Text
2021-09-09	1	COMPLAINT against U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. (Filing Fee $ 402.00, Receipt Number ANYSDC-25038020)Document filed by BuzzFeed Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Ex A-F, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet, # 3 Summons).(Swaminathan, Anand) (Entered: 09/09/2021)
2021-09-10		***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING PARTY MODIFICATION. Notice to attorney Anand Swaminathan. The party information for the following party/parties has been modified: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. The information for the party/parties has been modified for the following reason/reasons: party name was entered in all caps;. (pc) (Entered: 09/10/2021)
2021-09-10		***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING DEFICIENT CIVIL COVER SHEET. Notice to attorney Anand Swaminathan to RE-FILE Document No. 1 Complaint. The filing is deficient for the following reason(s): the event wrong event type was used to file the civil cover sheet; Nature of suit was not selected. Re-file the document using the event type Civil Cover Sheet found under the event list Other Documents and attach the correct PDF. (pc) (Entered: 09/10/2021)
2021-09-10		***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING DEFICIENT REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS. Notice to Attorney Anand Swaminathan to RE-FILE Document No. 1 Complaint. The filing is deficient for the following reason(s): the wrong event type was used to file the request for issuance of summons;. Re-file the document using the event type Request for Issuance of Summons found under the event list Service of Process - select the correct filer/filers - and attach the correct summons form PDF. (pc) (Entered: 09/10/2021)
2021-09-10		CASE OPENING INITIAL ASSIGNMENT NOTICE: The above-entitled action is assigned to Judge John G. Koeltl. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned District Judge, located at https://nysd.uscourts.gov/judges/district-judges . Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. Please download and review the ECF Rules and Instructions, located at https://nysd.uscourts.gov/rules/ecf-related-instructions . .(pc) (Entered: 09/10/2021)
2021-09-10		Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron is so designated. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1) parties are notified that they may consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties who wish to consent may access the necessary form at the following link: https://nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2018-06/AO-3.pdf . (pc) (Entered: 09/10/2021)
2021-09-10		Case Designated ECF. (pc) (Entered: 09/10/2021)
2021-09-10	2	CIVIL COVER SHEET filed..(Swaminathan, Anand) (Entered: 09/10/2021)
2021-09-10	3	REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to U.S. Department of Justice, United States Attorney's Office, U.S. Attorney General, re: 1 Complaint. Document filed by BuzzFeed Inc...(Swaminathan, Anand) (Entered: 09/10/2021)
2021-09-10	4	NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Anand Swaminathan on behalf of BuzzFeed Inc...(Swaminathan, Anand) (Entered: 09/10/2021)
2021-09-13	5	ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED as to U.S. Department Of Justice. (sj) (Entered: 09/13/2021)
2021-09-13	6	FILING ERROR - DEFICIENT PLEADING - SUMMONS REQUEST PDF ERROR - REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to United States Attorney's Office, re: 1 Complaint. Document filed by BuzzFeed Inc...(Swaminathan, Anand) Modified on 9/14/2021 (pc). (Entered: 09/13/2021)
2021-09-13	7	FILING ERROR - DEFICIENT PLEADING - SUMMONS REQUEST PDF ERROR - REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to U.S. Attorney General, re: 1 Complaint. Document filed by BuzzFeed Inc...(Swaminathan, Anand) Modified on 9/14/2021 (pc). (Entered: 09/13/2021)
2021-09-14		***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING DEFICIENT REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS. Notice to Attorney Anand Swaminathan to RE-FILE Document No. 6 Request for Issuance of Summons, 7 Request for Issuance of Summons,. The filing is deficient for the following reason(s): the PDF attached to the docket entry for the issuance of summons is not correct; Only parties listed on the complaint caption title can be issued a summons. If you wish to serve at this address, list the defendant's name followed by c/o;. Re-file the document using the event type Request for Issuance of Summons found under the event list Service of Process - select the correct filer/filers - and attach the correct summons form PDF. (pc) (Entered: 09/14/2021)
2021-09-14	8	REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Attorney General, re: 1 Complaint. Document filed by BuzzFeed Inc...(Swaminathan, Anand) (Entered: 09/14/2021)
2021-09-14	9	REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to U.S. Department of Justice, United States Attorney's Office, re: 1 Complaint. Document filed by BuzzFeed Inc...(Swaminathan, Anand) (Entered: 09/14/2021)
2021-09-15		Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge John G. Koeltl: Initial Conference set for 12/1/2021 at 03:30 PM before Judge John G. Koeltl. Dial-in: 888 363-4749, with access code 8140049. (Fletcher, Donnie) (Entered: 09/15/2021)
2021-09-15	10	ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED as to U.S. Department Of Justice..(pc) (Entered: 09/15/2021)
2021-09-15	11	ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED as to U.S. Department Of Justice..(pc) (Entered: 09/15/2021)
2021-09-27	12	RULE 7.1 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. No Corporate Parent. Document filed by BuzzFeed Inc...(Swaminathan, Anand) (Entered: 09/27/2021)
2021-10-26	13	ANSWER to 1 Complaint. Document filed by U.S. Department Of Justice..(Barnea, Jean-David) (Entered: 10/26/2021)
2021-10-28	14	ORDER: The parties are directed to submit a Rule 26 (f) report by November 12, 2021. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 10/27/2021) (ks) (Entered: 10/28/2021)
2021-10-28	15	FILING ERROR - DEFICIENT DOCKET ENTRY - MOTION for Matthew Vincent Topic to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Filing fee $ 200.00, receipt number ANYSDC-25258391. Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff. Document filed by BuzzFeed Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit, # 4 Exhibit).(Swaminathan, Anand) Modified on 10/29/2021 (aea). (Entered: 10/28/2021)
2021-10-29		>>>NOTICE REGARDING DEFICIENT MOTION TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE. Notice to RE-FILE Document No. 15 MOTION for Matthew Vincent Topic to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Filing fee $ 200.00, receipt number ANYSDC-25258391. Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff. The filing is deficient for the following reason(s): expired Certificate of Good Standing from Illinois; Affidavit is not notarized;. Re-file the motion as a Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice - attach the correct signed PDF - select the correct named filer/filers - attach valid Certificates of Good Standing issued within the past 30 days - attach Proposed Order. (aea) (Entered: 10/29/2021)
2021-10-29	16	ORDER FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE: The motion of Matthew V. Topic for admission to practice Pro Hac Vice in the above captioned action is granted. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Applicant is admitted to practice Pro Hac Vice in the above captioned case in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. All attorneys appearing before this Court are subject to the Local Rules of this Court, including the Rules governing discipline of attorneys. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 10/29/2021) (ks) (Entered: 10/29/2021)
2021-11-12	17	JOINT LETTER addressed to Judge John G. Koeltl from AUSA Jean-David Barnea dated 11/12/21 re: Proposed SJ Briefing. Document filed by U.S. Department Of Justice..(Barnea, Jean-David) (Entered: 11/12/2021)
2021-11-12	18	MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: 17 Letter filed by U.S. Department Of Justice. ENDORSEMENT: APPLICATION GRANTED. SO ORDERED. (Cross Motions due by 1/28/2022, Motions due by 12/21/2021, Responses due by 2/18/2022, Replies due by 3/4/2022.) (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 11/12/2021) (mml) (Entered: 11/15/2021)
2021-12-21	19	MOTION for Summary Judgment . Document filed by U.S. Department Of Justice. Responses due by 1/28/2022.(Barnea, Jean-David) (Entered: 12/21/2021)
2021-12-21	20	MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 19 MOTION for Summary Judgment . . Document filed by U.S. Department Of Justice..(Barnea, Jean-David) (Entered: 12/21/2021)
2021-12-21	21	DECLARATION of Deborah Waller, DOJ-OIG in Support re: 19 MOTION for Summary Judgment .. Document filed by U.S. Department Of Justice. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5).(Barnea, Jean-David) (Entered: 12/21/2021)
2022-02-15	22	NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Matthew Topic on behalf of BuzzFeed Inc...(Topic, Matthew) (Entered: 02/15/2022)
2022-02-16	23	LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time addressed to Judge John G. Koeltl from Matthew Topic dated 02/16/2022. Document filed by BuzzFeed Inc...(Topic, Matthew) (Entered: 02/16/2022)
2022-02-17	24	ORDER granting 23 Letter Motion for Extension of Time. APPLICATION GRANTED. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 2/17/2022) (tg) (Entered: 02/17/2022)
2022-02-17		Set/Reset Deadlines: Responses due by 4/15/2022 Replies due by 4/29/2022. (tg) (Entered: 02/17/2022)
2022-02-22		Set/Reset Deadlines: Cross Motions due by 3/15/2022. (tg) (Entered: 02/22/2022)
2022-03-15	25	NOTICE of Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. Document filed by BuzzFeed Inc...(Topic, Matthew) (Entered: 03/15/2022)
2022-03-15	26	FILING ERROR - WRONG EVENT TYPE SELECTED FROM MENU - CROSS MOTION for Summary Judgment and in Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment . Document filed by BuzzFeed Inc...(Topic, Matthew) Modified on 4/18/2022 (kj). (Entered: 03/15/2022)
2022-03-15		***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY TO RE-FILE DOCUMENT - EVENT TYPE ERROR. Notice to Attorney Matthew Topic to RE-FILE Document 26 CROSS MOTION for Summary Judgment and in Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment .. Use the event type Memorandum of Law found under the event list Opposing and Supporting Documents are filed separately, each receiving their own document #. (Opposing Documents are found under the Event Type - Replies, Opposition and Supporting Documents; Counter Statement to 56.1 is found under Other Answers). (kj) (Entered: 04/18/2022)
2022-04-15	27	REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 19 MOTION for Summary Judgment . and in Opposition to Plaintiff's Cross-Motion . Document filed by U.S. Department Of Justice..(Barnea, Jean-David) (Entered: 04/15/2022)
2022-04-19	28	MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Opposition re: 26 CROSS MOTION for Summary Judgment and in Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment . . Document filed by BuzzFeed Inc...(Topic, Matthew) (Entered: 04/19/2022)
2022-04-29	29	REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Opposition re: 19 MOTION for Summary Judgment . . Document filed by BuzzFeed Inc...(Topic, Matthew) (Entered: 04/29/2022)
2022-05-06	30	ORDER: The Department of Justice should submit one set of paper courtesy copies of the fully briefed cross-motions for summary judgment. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 5/6/2022) (tg) (Entered: 05/06/2022)
2022-06-21	31	MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER re: 19 MOTION for Summary Judgment . filed by U.S. Department Of Justice. The Court has considered all of the arguments raised by the parties. To the extent not specifically addressed above, the arguments are either moot or without merit. For the reasons explained above, the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is denied and DOJ's motion for summary judgment is granted. The Clerk is directed to enter-judgment dismissing this case. The Clerk is also directed to close all pending motions and to close this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 6/20/2022) (ks) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing. (Entered: 06/21/2022)
2022-06-21	32	CLERK'S JUDGMENT re: 31 Memorandum & Opinion in favor of U.S. Department Of Justice against BuzzFeed Inc. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Memorandum Opinion and Order dated June 21, 2022, the Court has considered all of the arguments raised by the parties. To the extent not specifically addressed, the arguments are either moot or without merit. The plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is denied and DOJ's motion for summary judgment is granted. Judgment is entered dismissing this case; accordingly, the case is closed. (Signed by Clerk of Court Ruby Krajick on 6/21/2022) (Attachments: # 1 Right to Appeal) (km) (Entered: 06/21/2022)
Hide Docket Events