72 new FOIA court documents, plus case descriptions

We have added 72 documents from 13 FOIA cases filed between April 5, 2015 and April 11, 2015. 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. WRIGHT v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (filed Apr 8, 2015)
   Chris Wright, a blogger, submitted a FOIA request to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services for records concerning the original software specifications, and contracting records concerning the award for developing the Healthcare.gov website. The agency acknowledged receipt of the request and indicated it had been processing the request, but after Wright was unable to get any further response from the agency, he filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Recovery of Costs
2. MISSOURI COALITION FOR THE ENVIRONMENT v. CORPS OF ENGINEERS (filed Apr 9, 2015)
   The Missouri Coalition for the Environment submitted a FOIA request to the Army Corps of Engineers-Little Rock District for records concerning a Joint Public Notice issued by the Corps of Engineers and the State of Missouri pursuant to the Clean Water Act. The agency withheld the records under Exemption 5 (privileges). The Coalition appealed the agency’s denial, but after hearing nothing further from the agency, the Coalition filed suit.
   Issues: Exemption 5 – Privileges – Deliberative process privilege – Deliberative, Exemption 5 – Privileges – Deliberative process privilege – Predecisional, Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
3. BAGWELL v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (filed Apr 8, 2015)
   Ryan Bagwell, who runs the Penn State Sunshine Fund, submitted a request to the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys at the Justice Department for records concerning the investigation of child abuse allegations at Penn State University. EOUSA denied Bagwell’s request based on Exemption 6 (invasion of privacy) and Exemption 7(C) (invasion of privacy concerning law enforcement records). Bagwell appealed EOUSA’s decision to the Office of Information Policy. OIP remanded the request to EOUSA with instructions to process it. Bagwell contacted EOUSA on a number of occasions, but after receiving no further substantive response to his request, Bagwell filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Recovery of Costs
4. CALIFORNIA INDIAN LAW ASSOCIATION v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (filed Apr 10, 2015)
   The California Indian Law Association submitted a FOIA request to the Office of the Solicitor General for records concerning a speech made by Acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal at the 2011 Indian Law Conference of the Federal Bar Association in New Mexico in which Katyal apologized for misrepresentations made by the Solicitor General in several cases involving Indian tribes. The Solicitor General disclosed 78 pages, of which 34 pages were completely redacted. The agency claimed Exemption 5 (privileges) as well as Exemption 2 (internal practices and procedures) and Exemption 6 (invasion of privacy). The Solicitor General did not disclose either the text or a video recording of the Kaytal speech. CILA appealed to the Office of Information Policy, which remanded the request to the Solicitor General for further processing. The Solicitor General disclosed parts of two previously redacted emails. CILA appealed once again to OIP, but after hearing nothing further, CILA filed suit.
   Issues: Adequacy – Search, Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees, Litigation – Vaughn index
5. RAD v. UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE et al (filed Apr 6, 2015)
   Christopher Rad submitted a FOIA request to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey for records concerning a specific district court case involving E-Gold, Bank of America, Skype, and others. Rad sent his request by certified mail twice and received a return receipt from the second certified mailing. After hearing nothing further from the agency, Rad filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Recovery of Costs
6. Gluckman v. United States Department of Homeland Security (filed Apr 6, 2015)
   David Gluckman submitted a FOIA request to U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement for records concerning how it classifies paperwork violations for businesses hiring immigrant workers and how fees are calculated. The agency acknowledged receipt of the request and invoked a 10-day time extension. The agency finally responded with a single Excel spreadsheet and 36 pages of responsive records, 13 pages of which were redacted under several exemptions. Gluckman appealed the agency’s denial and the agency upheld its decision. Gluckman attempted to get the agency to reconsider its decision, but after hearing nothing further, Gluckman filed suit.
   Issues: Exemption 6 – Invasion of privacy, Exemption 7(C) – Invasion of privacy concerning law enforcement records, Exemption 7(E) – Investigative methods or techniques, Litigation – Attorney’s fees, Litigation – Vaughn index
7. Jonathan Carrano v. Internal Revenue Service et al (filed Apr 13, 2015)
   Jonathan Carrano submitted a FOIA request to the IRS for the administrative file for the Estate of Charles Papaz, for which he is the administrator. The agency acknowledged receipt of the request, but after hearing nothing further from the agency, Carrano filed suit. His suit includes a second claim for an estate tax refund.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
8. BELANGAR v. JOHNSON et al (filed Apr 6, 2015)
   Demaris Belanger, an employee of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, submitted three email FOIA requests to FEMA for records concerning her accretion package. The agency acknowledged receipt of all three requests. After hearing nothing further from the agency, Belanger filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
9. ARGUS LEGAL, PLLC v. DEPARTMENT OF STATE (filed Apr 13, 2015)
   Argus Legal submitted a FOIA request to the Department of State for reports required under the Foreign Relations Authorization Act to be filed with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee annually pertaining to outstanding expropriation cases by Colombia. The agency acknowledged receipt of the request. When the agency failed to respond to the request within the statutory time limits, Argus Legal appealed the denial. That appeal was denied because the agency had not completed processing the request. Argus Legal then filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
10. American Civil Liberties Union v. Department of Health and Human Services et al (filed Apr 6, 2015)
    The ACLU submitted a FOIA request to the Administration for Children and Families for records concerning reproductive health care for unaccompanied minors. The agency acknowledged receipt of the request, but after hearing nothing further from the agency, the ACLU filed suit.
    Issues: Adequacy – Search, Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
11. National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild et al v. Homeland Security, Department of et al (filed Apr 13, 2015)
    The National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild and the ACLU submitted a FOIA request to the Department of Homeland Security for records concerning the use of reinstatement orders as a method of removal of immigrants subject to removal proceedings. The request asked for expedited processing and a fee waiver. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services granted the fee waiver request, but denied the request for expedited processing. DHS responded with two Internet links and indicated the request had been referred to USCIS and Immigration and Customs Enforcement for further response. The requesters appealed the decision. The agency upheld the DHS response and indicated that since USCIS and ICE had not yet responded there had been no denial of records. USCIS subsequently responded with 121 pages. After hearing nothing further from the agency, the requesters filed suit.
    Issues: Adequacy – Search, Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees, Public Interest Fee Waiver
12. CITIZENS UNITED v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE (filed Apr 9, 2015)
    Citizens United submitted two FOIA requests to the Department of State. The first request was for records concerning the Chagoury Group in Nigeria. The second request was for records concerning Rajiv Fernando. The agency acknowledged receipt of both requests, but after hearing nothing further from the agency, Citizens United filed suit.
    Issues: Adequacy – Search, Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees, Litigation – Vaughn index
13. ALLIANCE DEFENDING FREEDOM v. INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE (filed Apr 9, 2015)
    The Alliance Defending Freedom submitted a FOIA request to the IRS for records concerning the tax status of churches. The agency acknowledged receipt of the request and took a 10-day extension. After hearing nothing further from the agency, the Alliance filed suit.
    Issues: Adequacy – Search, Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees, Litigation – Vaughn index