Sightline Institute v. United States Bureau of Industry and Security and 13 other new FOIA lawsuits, plus case descriptions

We have added 79 documents from 14 FOIA cases filed between June 21, 2015 and June 27, 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. Sightline Institute v. United States Bureau of Industry and Security (filed Jun 25, 2015)
   The Sightline Institute, a research center in Seattle whose mission is to make the Northwest a model of global sustainability, submitted a FOIA request to the Bureau of Industry and Security, a component of the Department of Commerce charged with implementing the general ban on crude oil exports, for records regarding new developments regarding condensate, a light form of crude oil. BIS granted Sightline’s request for a fee waiver, but beyond a few exchanges between Sightline and BIS, the agency had failed to respond to the request and Sightline Institute filed suit. Sightline is asking the court to declare that the Export Administration Act no longer qualifies as an Exemption 3 statute.
   Issues: Exemption 3 – Statutory prohibition of disclosure, Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
2. Oliver v. Zimmer, Inc. et al (filed Jun 22, 2015)
   As part of as products liability complaint against Zimmer, Inc., William Oliver requested the number of times Zimmer prosthetics were used in knee-replacement surgeries at the Harry S. Truman Memorial Hospital and the number of times the prosthesis needed to be replaced. To the extent the case involves FOIA, Oliver’s claim seems to be for failure to disclose the records from the VA hospital.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit
3. Thuan Huy Ha v. US Department of Justice et al (filed Jun 22, 2015)
   Thuan Huy Ha submitted a FOIA request to the Department of Justice for billing records from his pharmacy that were taken as part of an investigation. The agency ultimately disclosed 40 pages of printouts with many data fields redacted. Ha appealed the redactions to the Office of Information Policy, which upheld the agency’s initial decision. Ha then made a second FOIA request for more billing records and when the agency never responded, he filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit
4. Western Watersheds Project v. USDA APHIS Wildlife Services (filed Jun 22, 2015)
   Western Watersheds Project submitted five FOIA requests to APHIS Wildlife Services for records concerning the agency’s Pocatello Supply Depot. The agency disclosed some documents responsive to Western Watersheds Project’s first request, but after some further back and forth without receiving further responsive records, Western Watersheds Project filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
5. Sheikh v. Jeh Johnson, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security et al (filed Jun 22, 2015)
   Hassan Sheikh submitted a FOIA request to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for records concerning the denial of his naturalization application. The agency acknowledged receipt of the request, but after hearing further from the agency, Sheikh filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
6. The New York Times Company et al v. Federal Bureau Of Investigation (filed Jun 22, 2015)
   New York Times reporter Scott Shane submitted a FOIA request to the FBI for summaries of interviews conducted with Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. The agency denied the request on the basis of Exemption 7(A) (ongoing investigation or proceeding). Shane appealed the decision to the Office of Information Policy which found that Exemption 7(A) was no longer applicable and sent the request back to the FBI for processing. The FBI then denied the request again in part under Exemption 7(A), but because of typographical errors in the letter Shane was unable to determine the grounds for various exemptions. Shane appealed again to OIP, but after hearing nothing further, Shane filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
7. TAX ANALYSTS v. INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE (filed Jun 23, 2015)
   Tax Analysts submitted a FOIA request to the IRS for records of bonus awards given to senior executive service or senior managers in the Office of Chief Counsel. The agency acknowledged receipt of the request and indicated it could not complete its response within the statutory time limit. After hearing nothing further from the agency, Tax Analysts filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
8. CODREA et al v. BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS, AND EXPLOSIVES (filed Jun 23, 2015)
   David Codrea, Len Savage, and the FFL Defense Research Center submitted a FOIA request to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms for various records pertaining to firearms. The agency failed to respond within the statutory time limits and the requesters filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
9. PISTON v. UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES (filed Jun 23, 2015)
   Michael Piston submitted a FOIA request to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for a Form I-924 concerning an application for a regional center submitted by Pangaea Regional Center LLC. Piston marked his request as extremely urgent. When the agency failed to respond to the request within the statutory time limits, Piston filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit
10. AIRAJ v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE (filed Jun 23, 2015)
    Hameedullah Amini Airaj, a former field interpreter for U.S. forces in Afghanistan, submitted a FOIA request to the Department of State for records pertaining to the agency’s denial of Airaj’s Chief of Mission application, a prerequisite for filing a special immigrant visa application for resettlement as a refugee. The agency provided records but did not provide the COM application denial, claiming it was exempt under the Immigration and Nationality Act. Airaj then appealed the agency’s decision, but after the agency failed to process his appeal, he filed suit.
    Issues: Exemption 3 – Statutory prohibition of disclosure, Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
11. LEOPOLD et al v. NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY et al (filed Jun 24, 2015)
    Journalists Jason Leopold and Alexia O’Brien submitted a total of 19 FOIA requests for records concerning Jacob Appelbaum, who is associated with Wikileaks. Leopold and O’Brien heard from several agencies concerning their requests, but for the most part, the agencies had not responded to the requests when Leopold and Appelbaum filed suit.
    Issues: Expedited processing, Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
12. Treatment Action Group et al v. Food and Drug Administration et al (filed Jun 25, 2015)
    The Treatment Action Group and the Global Health Justice Partnership submitted a FOIA request to the Food and Drug Administration for new drug applications for Sovaldi and Harvoni. The groups also requested a fee waiver. When the agency failed to respond within the statutory time limits, the groups filed an administrative appeal. The agency acknowledged receipt of the appeals but did not provide any further responses. The groups then filed suit.
    Issues: Choice of format, Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees, Public Interest Fee Waiver
13. NEGLEY v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (filed Jun 25, 2015)
    James Negley submitted a FOIA request to the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys for the file pertaining to his previous litigation against the FBI that had been referenced in a cover sheet received as part of a previous request. EOUSA acknowledged receipt of the request, but after hearing nothing further from the agency, Negley appealed to the Office of Information Policy. EOUSA ultimately responded to Negley’s request by indicating that it could find no responsive records. Negley then appealed that decision and after hearing nothing further, he filed suit.
    Issues: Adequacy – Search, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
14. LANGER v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (filed Jun 26, 2015)
    Howard Langer, an attorney in Philadelphia representing clients harmed by financial institutions that allow fraudulent mass-marketing entities access to the banking system, submitted a FOIA request to the Department of Justice for a letter from a Federal Reserve official to a bank officer at First Bank of Delaware that was referred to in its complaint against First Bank of Delaware for mass-marketing fraud. DOJ denied the request claiming the letter was protected by Exemption 4 (confidential business information). Langer appealed, arguing any confidentiality was waived when the letter was quoted in a public court filing. The agency sent the request back for processing. DOJ then told Langer that it was referring the letter to the Federal Reserve Bank in Atlanta for a release determination. The Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta said it was not an agency subject to FOIA and referred the letter back to the Federal Reserve in Washington, which refused to provide the letter to Langer. Langer then filed suit against the Justice Department.
    Issues: Agency, Litigation – Attorney’s fees