Case Detail

FOIA Project Annotation: Judge Amy Berman Jackson has ruled that the FBI conducted an adequate search and properly redacted information from records in response to FOIA requests from Marcelo Sandoval, but that EOUSA and Central District of Illinois have not yet sufficiently explained its search. Sandoval, a federal prisoner, made a number of requests to various components of the Department of Justice for records about himself, particularly those reflecting whether he was considered both a member of the Mexican mafia and a confidential informant. He gave a case number from the Central District of Illinois to EOUSA for search purposes. Sandoval made two FOIA requests to the FBI, the second of which added information about a kidnapping charge. The FBI initially told Sandoval that it found no records, but after he filed suit the FBI located 11 pages and released five pages in full or in part. Sandoval argued that none of the agencies considered amending his records under the Privacy Act. Although Jackson found Sandoval had failed to exhaust his administrative remedies because he never requested a Privacy Act amendment, she expressed puzzlement over the agencies' argument, noting that "defendant seems to be arguing that if an agency did not locate any responsive records to the FOIPA request, there could not be any 'inaccurate records' to correct under the Privacy Act, and therefore, the complaint fails to state a claim under the Privacy Act. But plaintiff's FOIA claim is distinct from his Privacy Act claim, and the production of responsive records under FOIA does not necessarily mean that the same documents would be responsive to a request to correct records under the Privacy Act." Jackson faulted the explanation of the searches done by EOUSA and the Central District of Illinois. She noted that 'because the EOUSA and USAO CDIL declarations lack the necessary specificity and clarity, the Court finds that summary judgment is inappropriate at this time." As to the FBI, because it had located some records, she concluded its search was sufficient and that its redactions made under Exemption 7 (law enforcement records) were appropriate.
Issues: Search - Detailed description of search, Adequacy - Search

FOIA Project Annotation: Judge Amy Berman Jackson has ruled that EOUSA conducted an adequate search for records pertaining to Marcelo Sandoval, particularly concerning allegations that he was member of the Mexican Mafia. Sandoval also requested records from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Central District of Illinois. After conducting a search, both EOUSA and CDIL found no responsive records. Sandoval filed suit and in an earlier ruling, Jackson found that the agencies' searches were deficient and ordered the agencies to provide a better explanation of their searches and to release any segregable material. Jackson observed that the agencies' original declarations "did not inspire confidence that the agencies conducted searches that were reasonably calculated to uncover relevant documents" and pointed out that the she found three deficiencies in the agencies' searches â€" failure to indicate whether Sandoval's three requests had been consolidated into one request, failure to explain the specific locations that were searched, and failure to explain the search for electronic records. Now, Jackson pointed out that "defendant has now cured these deficiencies." Jackson found the agency had now indicated that Sandoval's three requests were consolidated into one request, that the FOIA liaison at CDIL had searched all responsive records, and had listed the search terms used. Jackson noted that 'while defendants' supplemental declaration could have provided more details regarding the systems searched and why they were searched, the Court finds that the search conducted by defendant meets the standard of reasonableness required." She observed that "moreover, considering the broad nature of plaintiff's document request, defendants' search of all physical and electronic files retained by all employees of the U.S. Attorney's Office in question, using terms that included the plaintiff's first and last names, was 'reasonably calculated to discovery the requested documents.'"
Issues: Search - Reasonableness of search

Date Filed	Doc #	Docket Text
2016-05-26	1	COMPLAINT against EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, U.S. ATTORNEYS OFFICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ( Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 4616078022) filed by MARCELO SANDOVAL. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(jf) . (Entered: 05/31/2016)
2016-05-26		SUMMONS Not Issued as to EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, U.S. ATTORNEYS OFFICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (jf) (Entered: 05/31/2016)
2016-06-13	2	AFFIDAVIT by MARCELO SANDOVAL. (jf) (Entered: 06/14/2016)
2016-09-01	3	DISCHARGED PURSUANT TO MINUTE ORDER FILED 09/14/16.....ORDER. By September 30, 2016, plaintiff shall file proof of service for all defendants compliant with Rule 4 or show cause why this matter should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 9/1/2016. (lcabj2) Modified on 9/14/2016 (jth). (Entered: 09/01/2016)
2016-09-02		Set/Reset Deadlines: Proof or Service or Reply to Show Cause due by 9/30/2016. (zsm) (Entered: 09/02/2016)
2016-09-12	4	ENTERED IN ERROR (SEE MINUTE ORDER FILED ON 09/14/2016).....RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S served on 6/13/2016; FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION served on 6/13/2016; FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS served on 6/10/2016; U.S. ATTORNEYS OFFICE served on 6/10/2016; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE served on 6/10/2016, RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed on United States Attorney General. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney General 06/27/2016., RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed as to the United States Attorney. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney on 6/15/2016. ( Answer due for ALL FEDERAL DEFENDANTS by 7/15/2016.) (jf) Modified on 9/22/2016 (jf). (Entered: 09/14/2016)
2016-09-14		MINUTE ORDER. In light of 4 plaintiff's proof of service, it is ORDERED that 3 the Court's Order to Show Cause is hereby DISCHARGED. This is not to be construed as an expression of the Court's position as to the adequacy of service. It is FURTHER ORDERED that defendants shall answer or otherwise respond to the complaint on or before October 14, 2016. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 9/14/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 09/14/2016)
2016-09-14		Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendants shall answer or otherwise respond to the complaint by 10/14/2016. (jth) (Entered: 09/14/2016)
2016-09-14		MINUTE ORDER. Upon review of 4 plaintiffs' service materials and the Court's docket, it appears that no summons has been issued to or served on any defendant. It is therefore ORDERED that the deadline for the government's response to the complaint is hereby VACATED and plaintiff is ORDERED to obtain and serve summonses, with copies of the complaint, on all defendants in the manner required by Rule 4 and file proof of that service with the Court by October 14, 2016. Failure to do so may result in the case being dismissed for want of prosecution. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 9/14/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 09/14/2016)
2016-09-14		Set/Reset Deadlines: Plaintiff is Ordered to obtain and serve summonses, with copies of the complaint, on all defendants in the manner required by Rule 4 and file proof of that service with the Court by 10/14/2016. (jth) (Entered: 09/14/2016)
2016-10-19		MINUTE ORDER. Plaintiff was ordered on September 14, 2016 to obtain and serve summonses, with copies of the complaint, on all defendants in the manner required by Rule 4 and to file proof of that service with the Court by October 14, 2016. Plaintiff has failed to do so. By October 31, 2016, Plaintiff must show cause as to why this matter should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 10/19/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 10/19/2016)
2016-10-19		Set/Reset Deadlines: Plaintiff must show cause as to why this matter should not be dismissed for want of prosecution by 10/31/2016. (jth) (Entered: 10/19/2016)
2016-10-28	5	MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response to Court's Minute Order filed on 10/19/2016 by MARCELO SANDOVAL (jf) (Entered: 10/31/2016)
2016-11-01		MINUTE ORDER granting 5 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. Plaintiff is ORDERED to show cause as to why this matter should not be dismissed for want of prosecution by November 30, 2016. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 11/1/16. (lcabj2) (Entered: 11/01/2016)
2016-11-03	6	NOTICE to the Court by MARCELO SANDOVAL (jf) (Entered: 11/07/2016)
2016-11-08		MINUTE ORDER. On [Dkt. # 3] September 1, 2016, plaintiff was ordered to file proof of service for all defendants in compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4 or to show cause why this matter should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. The Court reviewed plaintiff's service materials and the Court's docket and concluded on September 14, 2016 that no summons had been issued or served on any defendant. Min. Order (Sept. 14, 2016). Since Rule 4(c)(1) requires that "a summons must be served with a copy of the complaint," the Court then ordered plaintiff to obtain and serve summonses, with copies of the complaint, on all defendants in the manner required by Rule 4 and to file proof of service with the Court by October 14, 2016. Min. Order (Sept. 14, 2016). Plaintiff failed to do so, so this Court ordered plaintiff to show cause as to why this matter should not be dismissed for want of prosecution. Min. Order (Oct. 19, 2016). On [Dkt. # 6] November 3, 2016, plaintiff attempted to explain to the Court that he has satisfied Rule 4. However, all plaintiff has done is provide this Court with the same materials he submitted before; plaintiff has yet to comply with the specific procedures set forth in Rule 4(a) and (b) that spell out what a summons to be presented to the clerk of the court must contain, and provide that a summons must be issued for each defendant to be served. Therefore, plaintiff is ORDERED to present the necessary summonses to the clerk to be issued, to serve them, along with copies of the complaint, on all defendants in the manner required by Rule 4 and to file proof of the completion of this service with the Court by December 16, 2016. Failure to do so may result in the case being dismissed for want of prosecution. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 11/8/16. (lcabj2) (Entered: 11/08/2016)
2016-11-09		Set/Reset Deadlines: Plaintiff is ORDERED to present the necessary summonses to the clerk to be issued, to serve them, along with copies of the complaint, on all defendants in the manner required by Rule 4 and to file proof of the completion of this service with the Court by 12/16/2016. (jth) (Entered: 11/09/2016)
2016-11-21	7	MOTION for Reconsideration re MINUTE ORDER filed on 11/08/2016 by MARCELO SANDOVAL (jf) (Entered: 11/23/2016)
2016-11-29		MINUTE ORDER finding as moot 7 plaintiff's motion for reconsideration. In 7 plaintiff's motion, he requests an enlargement of time to December 16, 2016 to complete what was ordered of him in the Court's November 8, 2016 Minute Order. But no reconsideration is required since the Court's Minute Order gave plaintiff until that date to complete proper service. Min. Order (Nov. 8, 2016). Plaintiff now seems to understand that he must present the necessary summonses to the clerk to be issued, and that he then must serve them, along with copies of the complaint, on all defendants in the manner required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4. This means that plaintiff must actually contact the clerk; he may not simply ask the Court to direct the clerk to issue the summonses that plaintiff attached to 7 his motion for reconsideration. So plaintiff is ORDERED to submit the summonses directly to the clerk to be issued, to then serve the summonses, along with copies of the complaint, on all defendants in the manner required by Rule 4, and to file proof of the completion of this service with the Court by January 6, 2017. Failure to do so may result in the case being dismissed for want of prosecution. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 11/29/16. (lcabj2) (Entered: 11/29/2016)
2016-11-29		Set/Reset Deadlines: Plaintiff is ORDERED to submit the summonses directly to the clerk to be issued, to then serve the summonses, along with copies of the complaint, on all defendants in the manner required by Rule 4, and to file proof of the completion of this service with the Court by 1/6/2017. (jth) (Entered: 11/29/2016)
2016-12-16	8	Letter from Marcelo Sandoval. "Let this be filed as letter from plaintiff" signed by Judge Amy B. Jackson on 12/15/2016 (jf) (Entered: 12/16/2016)
2016-12-19		MINUTE ORDER. In light of 8 plaintiff's letter to the Court, the Clerk of Court is ORDERED to prepare the summonses requested by plaintiff attached to his letter and return them to plaintiff. Plaintiff then must serve the summonses, along with copies of the complaint, on each defendant in the manner required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4, and file proof of the completion of this service with the Court by February 17, 2017. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 12/19/2016. (lcabj2) (Entered: 12/19/2016)
2016-12-19		Set/Reset Deadlines: The Clerk of Court is Ordered to prepare the summonses requested by plaintiff attached to his letter and return them to plaintiff. Plaintiff then must serve the summonses, along with copies of the complaint, on each defendant in the manner required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4, and file proof of the completion of this service with the Court by 2/17/2017. (jth) (Entered: 12/19/2016)
2016-12-20		SUMMONS (7) Issued as to EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, U.S. ATTORNEYS OFFICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (jd) (Entered: 12/20/2016)
2017-01-25	9	RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S served on 1/9/2017; FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION served on 1/9/2017; FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS served on 1/9/2017; U.S. ATTORNEYS OFFICE served on 1/6/2017; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE served on 1/9/2017, RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed on United States Attorney General. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney General 01/09/2017., RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed as to the United States Attorney. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney on 1/23/2017. ( Answer due for ALL FEDERAL DEFENDANTS by 2/22/2017.) (jf) (Entered: 01/27/2017)
2017-02-22	10	NOTICE of Appearance by Christopher Charles Hair on behalf of All Defendants (Hair, Christopher) (Entered: 02/22/2017)
2017-02-22	11	ANSWER to 1 Complaint, by EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, U.S. ATTORNEYS OFFICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.(Hair, Christopher) (Entered: 02/22/2017)
2017-02-23		MINUTE ORDER. Before the Court in this FOIA case are a complaint and an answer. The requirements of Local Civil Rule 16.3 and Rule 26(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure appear to be inapplicable. Defendants shall file a dispositive motion or, in the alternative, a report setting forth the schedule for the completion of its production of documents to plaintiff on or before March 23, 2017. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 2/23/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 02/23/2017)
2017-03-05		Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendants shall file a dispositive motion or, in the alternative, a report setting forth the schedule for the completion of its production of documents to the plaintiff by 3/23/2017. (jth) (Entered: 03/05/2017)
2017-03-20	12	MOTION for Extension of Time to File Dispositive Motion by EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, U.S. ATTORNEYS OFFICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (Hair, Christopher) (Entered: 03/20/2017)
2017-03-20		MINUTE ORDER granting 12 Motion for Extension of Time. Defendants shall file their dispositive motion(s) by May 22, 2017. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 3/20/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 03/20/2017)
2017-04-06	13	MOTION for Leave to Amend Complaint by MARCELO SANDOVAL (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(jf) . (Entered: 04/07/2017)
2017-04-07		MINUTE ORDER. Plaintiff has filed 13 a motion for leave to amend plaintiff's complaint, but the filing does not comport with Local Civil Rule 15.1, which requires: "A motion for leave to file an amended pleading shall be accompanied by an original of the proposed pleading as amended." Therefore, plaintiff must file a complete copy of the proposed amended complaint, not just descriptions of how each paragraph will be amended, by April 28, 2017. But plaintiff does not have to re-file the proposed attachments already submitted to the Court. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 4/7/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 04/07/2017)
2017-04-09		Set/Reset Deadlines: Plaintiff must file a complete copy of the proposed amended complaint, not just descriptions of how each paragraph will be amended, by 4/28/2017. (jth) (Entered: 04/09/2017)
2017-04-26	14	MOTION for Leave to Amend Complaint by MARCELO SANDOVAL (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(zrdj) (Entered: 04/28/2017)
2017-05-02		MINUTE ORDER. Plaintiff has filed 14 a second motion for leave to file an amended complaint, but the filing again does not comport with Local Rule 15.1, which requires: "A motion for leave to file an amended pleading shall be accompanied by an original of the proposed pleading as amended." Plaintiff must put all of his claims into a single document, including all unchanged original paragraphs in full as well as any new substituted paragraphs in full so that the Court has plaintiff's entire amended complaint in one document. Plaintiff must file a complete copy of the proposed amended complaint by May 23, 2017. Failure to do so may result in the denial of 14 plaintiff's motion for leave to file an amended complaint and a ruling that the case must proceed on the original complaint. In light of 14 plaintiff's second motion for leave to file an amended complaint, his first 13 motion for leave to file an amended complaint is DENIED as MOOT. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 5/2/2017 (lcabj2) (Entered: 05/02/2017)
2017-05-16	15	MOTION for Extension of Time to File Dispositive Motion by EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, U.S. ATTORNEYS OFFICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (Hair, Christopher) (Entered: 05/16/2017)
2017-05-16		MINUTE ORDER granting 15 motion for extension of time. Defendants shall file their dispositive motion(s) by June 22, 2017. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 5/16/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 05/16/2017)
2017-06-05		MINUTE ORDER denying 14 plaintiff's motion for leave to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff has failed to file a motion for leave to file an amended complaint that comports with the Local Rules and the Court's specific instructions. However, the Court notes that plaintiff's proposed amendments generally appear to be attempts to add legal arguments or exhibits, rather than factual allegations, and those may be more appropriately provided in opposition to any motion for summary judgment that defendants file. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 6/5/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 06/05/2017)
2017-06-21	16	NOTICE OF SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL by Scott Leeson Sroka on behalf of EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, U.S. ATTORNEYS OFFICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Substituting for attorney Christopher Charles Hair (Sroka, Scott) (Entered: 06/21/2017)
2017-06-22	17	MOTION to Dismiss and for Summary Judgment by EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, U.S. ATTORNEYS OFFICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (Attachments: # 1 Statement of Facts, # 2 Memorandum in Support, # 3 Declaration of David Hardy, # 4 Declaration of Dominick Desanto, # 5 Declaration of David Luczynski, # 6 Declaration of Julie Leeper)(Sroka, Scott). Added MOTION for Summary Judgment on 6/23/2017 (jf). (Entered: 06/22/2017)
2017-06-26	18	ORDER. Plaintiff shall respond to 17 defendants' motion to dismiss on or before July 26, 2017. If plaintiff fails to file a timely response, the Court will treat defendants' motion as conceded and dismiss the case. See Order for details. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 6/26/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 06/26/2017)
2017-10-03	19	ORDER. Plaintiff shall respond to 17 defendants' motion to dismiss and for summary judgment on or before October 24, 2017. If plaintiff fails to file a timely response, the Court will grant the motion to dismiss as conceded and accept any facts set forth in defendants' motion for summary judgment as true, and it may decide the matter in defendants' favor without the benefit of plaintiff's position. The Court also notes that it already ordered plaintiff to file an opposition to defendants' motion by July 26, 2017, and plaintiff has failed to file anything or to seek an extension. Therefore, if plaintiff fails to file a timely response to defendants' motion, the Court could also, pursuant to Local Rule 83.23, dismiss the case for want of prosecution. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 10/3/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 10/03/2017)
2017-10-20	20	RESPONSE re 17 MOTION to Dismiss and for Summary Judgment MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by MARCELO SANDOVAL. (jf) (Entered: 10/23/2017)
2017-11-02	21	ORDER. Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12 and 56, and for the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, it is hereby ORDERED that 17 defendants' motion to dismiss and for summary judgment is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. Defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's Privacy Act claims against all defendants, and plaintiff's FOIA claim against the Federal Bureau of Prisons, is hereby GRANTED. Defendants' motion for summary judgment on plaintiff's FOIA claim against the Federal Bureau of Investigation is GRANTED, but defendants' motion for summary judgment on plaintiff's FOIA claims against the Department of Justice, the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, and the United States Attorney's Office for the Central District of Illinois is DENIED. The matter is remanded to the agencies to provide a more detailed justification for the adequacy of the searches, and to release any reasonably segregable non-exempt material to plaintiff consistent with FOIA. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall file a joint status report by January 2, 2018 to update the Court on whether further proceedings are necessary in this matter. See Order for details. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 11/2/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 11/02/2017)
2017-11-02	22	MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 11/2/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 11/02/2017)
2017-11-16	23	RESPONSE TO ORDER OF THE COURT re 21 Order on Motion to Dismiss, Order on Motion for Summary Judgment, filed by MARCELO SANDOVAL. (jf) (Entered: 11/20/2017)
2017-11-21		MINUTE ORDER. Given plaintiff's effective communication with the Court in English to date, and lack of any procedures for translating orders, the Court will not take any action in response to plaintiff's request that the Court communicate in Spanish at this time. The agencies are still required to file a status report by January 2, 2018 to update the Court on whether further proceedings are necessary in this matter. Plaintiff must respond to the agencies' status report by January 26, 2018. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 11/21/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 11/21/2017)
2017-12-13	24	MOTION for Hearing by MARCELO SANDOVAL. "Leave to file GRANTED. File as Motion for Hearing" signed by Judge Amy B. Jackson on 12/13/2017 (jf) (Entered: 12/15/2017)
2017-12-15		MINUTE ORDER denying 24 Motion for Hearing. Plaintiff seems to be seeking a hearing concerning his criminal case but the only matter before the Court is the response to his FOIA request, and the Court is awaiting a further status report from the government on that issue. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 12/15/2017. (lcabj2) (Entered: 12/15/2017)
2018-01-02	25	STATUS REPORT by U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. (Sroka, Scott) (Entered: 01/02/2018)
2018-01-03		MINUTE ORDER. Defendants' supplemental declaration is due on February 2, 2018. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 1/3/2018. (lcabj2) (Entered: 01/03/2018)
2018-01-03		Set/Reset Deadlines: Supplemental declaration due by 2/2/2018. (tb) (Entered: 01/03/2018)
2018-02-02	26	STATUS REPORT by EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, U.S. ATTORNEYS OFFICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. (Sroka, Scott) (Entered: 02/02/2018)
2018-02-05		MINUTE ORDER. Defendants' supplemental declaration is due on February 23, 2018. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 2/5/2018. (lcabj2) (Entered: 02/05/2018)
2018-02-23	27	STATUS REPORT and Supplemental Declaration by U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Julie A. Leeper)(Sroka, Scott) (Entered: 02/23/2018)
2018-02-23		MINUTE ORDER. Plaintiff must inform the Court by March 16, 2018 if he has any objections to the adequacy of the searches described in [27-1] defendants' supplemental declaration, and if he believes any further proceedings are necessary. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 2/23/2018. (lcabj2) (Entered: 02/23/2018)
2018-03-08	28	RESPONSE TO ORDER OF THE COURT re Minute Order filed on 02/23/2018 filed by MARCELO SANDOVAL. (jf) (Entered: 03/13/2018)
2018-03-13		MINUTE ORDER. In light of plaintiff's 28 response to the Court's order, defendants must file any renewed motion for summary judgment by April 3, 2018. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 3/13/2018. (lcabj2) (Entered: 03/13/2018)
2018-04-03	29	Second MOTION for Summary Judgment by U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE U.S. ATTORNEY'S. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support of Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment, # 2 Declaration of Julie Leeper, # 3 Declaration of Julie Leeper (Supplemental))(Sroka, Scott) Modified to add filers on 4/5/2018 (znmw). (Entered: 04/03/2018)
2018-04-04	30	ORDER. Plaintiff must respond to defendants' motion for summary judgment on or before May 4, 2018. If plaintiff fails to file a timely response, the Court will accept any facts set forth in defendants' motion for summary judgment as true, and it may decide the matter in defendants' favor without the benefit of plaintiff's position. See Order for details. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 4/4/2018. (lcabj2) (Entered: 04/04/2018)
2018-04-20	31	RESPONSE re 29 Second MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by MARCELO SANDOVAL. "Leave to file GRANTED as Plaintiff's Response to Defendants' Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment" signed by Amy B. Jackson on 04/20/2018 (jf) (Entered: 04/27/2018)
2018-04-23	32	RESPONSE re 29 Second MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by MARCELO SANDOVAL. (jf) (Entered: 04/27/2018)
2018-08-08	33	MOTION to Take Judicial Notice by MARCELO SANDOVAL (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(jf) (Entered: 08/10/2018)
2019-01-24	34	ORDER. Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 56 and 58, and for the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 29 is GRANTED. This is a final appealable order. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 1/24/2019. (lcabj2) (Entered: 01/24/2019)
2019-01-24	35	MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Amy Berman Jackson on 1/24/2019. (lcabj2) (Entered: 01/24/2019)
Hide Docket Events