68 new FOIA court documents, plus case descriptions

We have added 68 documents from 16 FOIA cases filed between June 29, 2014 and July 12, 2014. Note that there can be delays between the date a case is filed and when it shows up on PACER. If there are filings from this period that have yet to be posted on PACER, this FOIA Project list may not be complete.

Click on a case title below to view details for that case, including links to the associated docket and complaint documents.

1. Electronic Frontier Foundation v. National Security Agency et al (filed Jul 1, 2014)
   After computer researchers announced the discovery of a flaw in the open-source cryptographic library OpenSSL known as “Heartbleed,” the Electronic Frontier Foundation submitted FOIA requests to the National Security Agency and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence for records concerning the development or implementation of the vulnerabilities and equity process and principles for guiding decision making as described in a White House blog post referring to the problem. EFF asked for expedited processing, ONDI granted expedited processing, but NSA denied expedition. EFF appealed the denial to NSA. After hearing nothing further from either agency, EFF filed suit.
   Issues: immediate disclosure of all records, grant expedited processing, expeditious proceedings, attorney’s fees
2. Spink v. United States Probation & Pretrial Services et al (filed Jul 1, 2014)
   Douglas Spink, a federal prisoner, submitted a FOIA request to Connie Smith, Chief of the U.S. Probation & Pretrial Services Office for the Western District of Washington for records related to his conviction. After the agency failed to respond within the statutory time limit, Spink filed an appeal. After no further response from the agency, Spink filed suit.
   Issues: disclosure of records, attorney’s fees
3. Dwayne D. Daniels v. Internal Revenue Service (filed Jul 2, 2014)
   Dwayne Daniels submitted a FOIA request to the IRS in July 2010 for any Form 5344, an examination closing record, issued to him for tax years 2004-2006. The agency provided only a sample Form 5344. Daniels appealed the agency’s failure to find any Form 5344 related to him. The agency concluded that it had conducted an adequate search. Daniels submitted a second FOIA request in February 2014 for a number of forms he alleged the agency should have pertaining to his taxes. The agency responded with a single form and when Daniels appealed the agency indicated the form was the only responsive record. Daniels then filed suit.
   Issues: conduct adequate search by date certain, disclosure of all responsive records, attorney’s fees
4. EDELMAN v. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION (filed Jul 3, 2014)
   Richard Edelman, who operates a website providing information to investors in the Empire State Building, submitted six FOIA requests to the Securities and Exchange Commission concerning investments related to the Empire State Building. After the agency failed to respond to any of his requests within the statutory time limit, Edelman appealed the denial of his requests. In response to two of his appeals, the agency issued a Glomar response, neither confirming nor denying the existence of records, under Exemption 7(A) (ongoing investigation). Edelman finally filed suit.
   Issues: prompt disclosure of all responsive records, disclosure of all segregable portions of records, attorney’s fees
5. Lucaj v. United States Department of Justice, et al (filed Jul 3, 2014)
   Doda Lucaj, an Albanian-American residing in Michigan, was arrested in Vienna in 2006 and allegedly illegally extradited to Montenegro, where he underwent a ten-month trial. He was apparently questioned by FBI agents in Vienna. To find out more about his arrest and U.S. involvement, Lucaj submitted a FOIA request to the FBI for records concerning his questioning by the FBI in Vienna. The agency acknowledged receipt of his request but after the agency failed to respond further, Lucaj filed suit.
   Issues: disclosure of records in electronic format to Lucaj and his attorney, attorney’s fees
6. Ehret v. United States Department of Defense et al (filed Jul 7, 2014)
   John Ehret submitted a FOIA request to the Detroit District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for an unpublished report concerning the erosion effect in Lake Michigan because of a nuclear power plant located near the St. Joseph Harbor jetties, near Ehret’s residence. The Detroit District responded by telling Ehret it could not find the report he described. Ehret appealed the no records response and was able to provide sufficient identifying information for the agency to locate the record, which it released to Ehret. However, Ehret was dissatisfied because certain parts were missing or damaged. He then filed suit.
   Issues: conduct adequate search, disclosure of records by date certain, production of Vaughn index, require agency to explain why disclosure was not considered in the public interest, attorney’s fees
7. PUBLIC EMPLOYEES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY v. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE (filed Jul 8, 2014)
   PEER submitted a FOIA request to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for records from the Office of the Science Advisor concerning scientific misconduct. The agency responded to PEER’s request by disclosing 91 pages and withholding 57 pages under Exemption 5 (privileges) and Exemption 6 (invasion of privacy). PEER appealed the Exemption 5 denials and the agency agreed to disclose more information. The agency then disclosed several redacted reports. Still unsatisfied with the agency’s response, PEER filed suit.
   Issues: improper withholding, disclosure of all responsive records, attorney’s fees
8. WP COMPANY LLC v. WMATA (filed Jul 8, 2014)
   The Washington Post made two requests to the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority under its Public Access to Records Policy, WMATA’s administrative equivalent to FOIA, for records concerning settlement agreements resolving litigation filed as a result of the fatal 2009 Metrorail collision near the Fort Totten station. A year later, WMATA denied both requests in full, claiming they were protected by the PARP exemptions for confidential business information, privileged documents, and invasion of personal privacy. The Washington Post appealed the denials of its PARP requests and also moved to intervene in federal litigation concerning liability for the collision to unseal documents related to the settlement agreements with minors that had been filed with the court. Meanwhile, WMATA told the Washington Post that it would hold its PARP request in abeyance until the decision pertaining to unsealing the documents filed with the court. The court disclosed the settlement agreements with redactions of personally identifying information. WMATA then responded to the Washington Post’s PARP requests by denying information about the settlement agreements under the exemptions for confidential business information and privileged information. The Washington Post then filed suit.
   Issues: disclosure of responsive records, attorney’s fees
9. Kurshid Jehan Shaikh v. United States Department of State (filed Jul 9, 2014)
   Kurshid Jehan Shaikh, a native of Pakistan, obtained lawful permanent resident status in 2009. In February 2014, she was placed into removal proceedings because she had failed to comply with a 1998 voluntary departure order. Shaikh asserted that she left the U.S. as required in July 1998 and was issued a nonimmigrant visa by the U.S. Consulate in Islamabad, Pakistan in September 1998. Through her attorney, Shaikh submitted a FOIA request to the Department of State for records related to her nonimmigrant visa applications. The agency acknowledged receipt of her request, but after hearing nothing further from the agency, Shaikh filed suit.
   Issues: conduct adequate search, disclosure of non-exempt records by date certain, production of Vaughn index, attorney’s fees
10. Milner v. United States Department of Defense et al (filed Jul 9, 2014)
    Glen Milner submitted a FOIA request to the Department of Defense for records related to review or approval by DOD’s Explosive Safety Board for the Navy’s planned second Explosives Handling Wharf at Naval Base Kitnap-Bangor. Milner requested expedited processing and a fee waiver. DOD denied Milner’s request for expedited processing and a fee waiver and said it would not be able to respond within the statutory 20 days. The agency provided Milner with a fee estimate of $13,000 for search time. After finally denying Milner’s appeal of its original denial of his request for expedited processing, the agency disclosed three heavily redacted records containing 23 pages, with redactions made primarily under Exemption 5 (privileges). The agency agreed to conduct a new search, but after being granted some further information on appeal, Milner was still unsatisfied and filed suit.
    Issues: disclosure of all responsive records, waiver of fees, attorney’s fees
11. Brennan v. Federal Emergency Management Agency (filed Jul 11, 2014)
    David Brennan submitted a request to the Federal Emergency Management Agency for records concerning the agency’s policies for eligibility for individual disaster assistance and the handling of such applications. The agency asked Brennan to clarify his request, which he did. The agency then notified Brennan that it was taking a 10-day extension. After hearing nothing further, Brennan filed suit and filed a separate Privacy Act claim as well.
    Issues: prompt disclosure of records, expeditious proceedings
12. Brennan v. Federal Emergency Management Agency (filed Jul 11, 2014)
    David Brennan filed a claim for disaster assistance with the Federal Emergency Management Agency. He subsequently made a Privacy Act request for his file. After the agency failed to respond to his Privacy Act request, Brennan filed suit. This is a companion case to Brennan v. FEMA, 4:14-cv-00407-JLH (E.D. Ark.) filed 7/11/14.
    Issues: prompt disclosure of records, expeditious proceedings
13. LOOKS FILMPRODUKTIONEN GMBH v. CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY (filed Jul 11, 2014)
    LOOKS Filmproducktionen, a German documentary film production company making a film on the Stasi, the East German secret police, made a request to the CIA for all records on Erich Mielke, head of the Stasi from 1957-1989. The CIA issued a Glomar response, neither confirming nor denying the existence of records. LOOKS appealed and the agency affirmed its initial denial. LOOKS then asked the CIA to reconsider its appeal decision, which was also denied by the agency. LOOKS then appealed to the Office of Government Information Services concerning the CIA’s refusal to reconsider its denial of LOOKS’ appeal. The CIA initially told OGIS it would not reconsider the appeal, but after LOOKS’ counsel discovered as the result of a database search at the National Archives and Records Administration a number of records on Mielke previously disclosed by the CIA, the agency agreed to reconsider the request. LOOKS then submitted two new FOIA requests pertaining to Mielke