Skip to content

Case Detail

[Subscribe to updates]
Case TitleBarrack v. United States Department of State
DistrictDistrict of Colorado
CityDenver
Case Number1:2022cv02426
Date Filed2022-09-20
Date ClosedOpen
JudgeJudge Raymond P. Moore
PlaintiffThomas J. Barrack, Jr.
Case DescriptionThomas Barrack submitted a FOIA request to the Department of State for records concerning himself. He asked for expedited processing. He also submitted two other FOIA requests asking for communications between certain named individuals concerning Barrack. The agency acknowledged those requests. The agency denied Barrack's request for expedited processing. After hearing nothing further from the agency, Barrack filed suit.
Complaint issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Expedited processing, Litigation - Attorney's fees

DefendantUnited States Department of State
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
Complaint attachment 9
Complaint attachment 10
Complaint attachment 11
Complaint attachment 12
User-contributed Documents
 
Docket Events (Hide)
Date FiledDoc #Docket Text

2022-09-201COMPLAINT For Declaratory and Injunctive Relief Under the Freedom of Information Act against United States Department of State (Filing fee $ 402,Receipt Number ACODC-8666178)Attorney Jason R. Dunn added to party Thomas J. Barrack, Jr(pty:pla), filed by Thomas J. Barrack, Jr. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1- First Request, # 2 Exhibit 2- Email 6-29-22, # 3 Exhibit 3- First Acknowledgement, # 4 Exhibit 4- Second Request, # 5 Exhibit 5- Second Acknowledgement, # 6 Exhibit 6- OIPS Letter 1, # 7 Exhibit 7- OIPS Letter 2, # 8 Exhibit 8- Third Request, # 9 Summons To the Attorney General, # 10 Summons To the Department of State, # 11 Summons To the US Attorney- Colorado, # 12 Civil Cover Sheet)(Dunn, Jason) (Entered: 09/20/2022)
2022-09-202Case assigned to Judge Raymond P. Moore and drawn to Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix. Text Only Entry. (jcharl, ) (Entered: 09/20/2022)
2022-09-203SUMMONS issued by Clerk. (Attachments: # 1 Summons, # 2 Summons, # 3 Magistrate Judge Consent Form) (jcharl, ) (Entered: 09/20/2022)
2022-09-204ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and (B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a) and (b), this case is referred to the assigned United States Magistrate Judge to (1) convene a scheduling conference under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) and enter a scheduling order meeting the requirements of D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.2, (2) conduct such status conferences and issue such orders necessary for compliance with the scheduling order, including amendments or modifications of the scheduling order upon a showing of good cause, (3) hear and determine pretrial matters, including discovery and other non-dispositive motions, (4) conduct a pretrial conference and enter a pretrial order, and (5) conduct hearings, including evidentiary hearings, and submit proposed findings of fact and recommendations for rulings on dispositive motions. Court sponsored alternative dispute resolution is governed by D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.6. On the recommendation or informal request of the magistrate judge or on the request of the parties by motion, this court may direct the parties to engage in an early neutral evaluation, a settlement conference, or another alternative dispute resolution proceeding. By Judge Raymond P. Moore on 9/20/2022. (Text Only Entry) (rmsec ) (Entered: 09/20/2022)
2022-09-205MINUTE ORDER: With the assignment of this matter, the parties are advised that throughout this case they are expected to be familiar and comply with not only the Local Rules of this District, but also Judge Raymond P. Moore's Civil Practice Standards, which may be found at: http://www.cod.uscourts.gov/JudicialOfficers/ActiveArticleIIIJudges/HonRaymondPMoore.aspx. SO ORDERED by Judge Raymond P. Moore on 9/20/2022. (Text Only Entry) (rmsec ) (Entered: 09/20/2022)
2022-09-216NOTICE of Entry of Appearance by Joseph C. Haupt on behalf of Thomas J. Barrack, JrAttorney Joseph C. Haupt added to party Thomas J. Barrack, Jr(pty:pla) (Haupt, Joseph) (Entered: 09/21/2022)
2022-09-277ORDER REASSIGNING MAGISTRATE JUDGE. Pursuant to D.C. Colo. L. Civ. R. 40.1(a), and as approved by the Chief Judge of the Court, the undersigned directs that the Clerk of the Court reassign this action to Magistrate Judge Gallagher as the referral judge. All further pleadings in this case shall reflect the case number of 22-cv-02426-RM-GPG. By Judge Raymond P. Moore on 9/27/2022. (sdunb, ) (Entered: 09/27/2022)
2022-09-278ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Gordon P. Gallagher. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and (B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a) and (b), this case is referred to the assigned United States Magistrate Judge to (1) convene a scheduling conference under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) and enter a scheduling order meeting the requirements of D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.2, (2) conduct such status conferences and issue such orders necessary for compliance with the scheduling order, including amendments or modifications of the scheduling order upon a showing of good cause, (3) hear and determine pretrial matters, including discovery and other non-dispositive motions, (4) conduct a pretrial conference and enter a pretrial order, and (5) conduct hearings, including evidentiary hearings, and submit proposed findings of fact and recommendations for rulings on dispositive motions. Court sponsored alternative dispute resolution is governed by D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.6. On the recommendation or informal request of the magistrate judge or on the request of the parties by motion, this court may direct the parties to engage in an early neutral evaluation, a settlement conference, or another alternative dispute resolution proceeding. By Judge Raymond P. Moore on 9/27/2022. (rmsec ) (Entered: 09/27/2022)
2022-09-279MINUTE ORDER: This matter is before the Court sua sponte. In his Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief under the Freedom of Information Act 1 , Plaintiff seeks, inter alia, an order requiring Defendant to expeditiously process his requests for documents, within ten days. Although Plaintiff has not filed a motion for a preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order in this case, his relief is functionally the same. To the extent he seeks such relief in his Complaint as a substitute for such a motion, that request is DENIED for the same reasons stated at the telephonic status conference held on August 5, 2022, in Barrack v. United States Department of Justice , No. 22-cv-01800-RM, in which his request for an expedited preliminary injunction was denied. SO ORDERED by Judge Raymond P. Moore on 9/27/2022. (Text Only Entry) (rmsec ) (Entered: 09/27/2022)
2022-10-3110STIPULATION for Extension of Time to Answer or Respond to the Complaint by Defendant United States Department of State. United States Department of State answer due 11/16/2022. (Scott, Olivia) (Entered: 10/31/2022)
2022-11-1611MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim , MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction by Defendant United States Department of State. (Scott, Olivia) (Entered: 11/16/2022)
2022-12-0212STIPULATION of Dismissal of Case by Plaintiff Thomas J. Barrack, Jr. (Dunn, Jason) (Entered: 12/02/2022)
Hide Docket Events
by FOIA Project Staff
Skip to toolbar