CAUSE OF ACTION INSTITUTE v. NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION et al and 9 other new FOIA lawsuits, plus case descriptions

We have added 70 documents from 10 FOIA cases filed between February 7, 2016 and February 13, 2016. 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. CAUSE OF ACTION INSTITUTE v. NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION et al (filed Feb 12, 2016)
   Cause of Action submitted a FOIA request to the Clinton Presidential Library for records of communications between the library director and Hillary Clinton or any of her representatives pertaining to her records when she was Secretary of State. Cause of Action requested expedited processing and a fee waiver. The agency granted Cause of Action expedited processing, but when Cause of Action realized its request had not been expedited, it appealed. The Clinton Library told Cause of Action that there were two older expedited requests still being processed. Cause of Action submitted another FOIA request to the National Archives and Records Administration for records concerning communications between NARA and the Department of State pertaining to recovery of federal records improperly taken by Hillary Clinton. Cause of Action requested expedited processing and inclusion in the media fee category. The agency granted expedited processing. NARA told Cause of Action it was still processing the request. After hearing further concerning either request, Cause of Action filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees, Litigation – Vaughn index
2. Hinson-Gribble v. United States Office of Personnel Management et al (filed Feb 11, 2016)
   Quancidine Hinson-Gribble filed suit against OPM and a number of related individual employees, many of whom worked for the Army for government’s failure to correct the security breach that resulted in a number of names of government employees in the OPM database being exposed to hacking. While this is a privacy issue, Hinson-Gribble does not state a claim under FOIA, which pertains only to access to government information and has no remedy for the way in which records are maintained.
   Issues: FOIA not mentioned
3. Hernandez-Lima v. United States Department of Justice, United States National Central Bureau, Interpol Washington et al (filed Feb 11, 2016)
   Elias Hernandez-Lima, a refugee from El Salvador who was living illegally in the United States and had since been detained, submitted a FOIA request through his attorneys to Interpol-Washington for records about himself. The agency acknowledged receipt of the request. The agency denied the request under Exemption 7(A) (interference with ongoing investigation or proceeding). Hernandez-Lima appealed the decision, which was upheld. He then filed suit.
   Issues: Exemption 7(A) – Interference with ongoing investigation, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
4. HEARTLAND ALLIANCE FOR HUMAN NEEDS & HUMAN RIGHTS v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY et al (filed Feb 8, 2016)
   Heartland Alliance for Human Needs & Human Rights submitted a FOIA request to the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties for records related to the statistical monitoring of the Secure Communities program, an immigration enforcement program administered by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement from 2008-2014. After narrowing its request, the agency located 7,735 pages as responsive to the request. The agency released 2,833 pages entirely and withheld 4,902 pages entirely under Exemption 5 (privileges), Exemption 6 (invasion of privacy) and Exemption 7(C) (invasion of privacy concerning law enforcement records). Heartland appealed that decision and the agency remanded the case back to CRCL for clarification of exemption claims. Heartland heard nothing further from the agency concerning that request. Heartland submitted a second FOIA request to ICE for records concerning ICE’s monitoring of the Secure Communities program. The agency acknowledged the request, but after the agency failed to respond further, Heartland appealed the delay. After hearing nothing further concerning its appeal, Heartland filed suit on both requests.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
5. Kurtz, et al v. U.S. Department of Justice (filed Feb 8, 2016)
   Jennifer Gradecki, a graduate student at SUNY Buffalo, submitted a FOIA request to the FBI for records pertaining to Steven John Kurtz, a local artist and activist, apparently with Kurtz’s permission. The FBI first told Kurtz that it had located 2,327 pages and asked Kurtz to commit to pay for duplication. Kurtz agreed to pay. The agency subsequently indicated there were 2,512 pages and that duplication fees would be $85. Again, Kurtz agreed to pay, but after hearing nothing further from the FBI, Gradecki filed an appeal with OIP. OIP acknowledged receipt of the appeal, but after hearing from the agency, Gradecki and Kurtz filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees, Litigation – Vaughn index
6. Center For Human Rights and Constitutional Law et al v. United States Department of State (filed Feb 9, 2016)
   The Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law and a coalition of similar public interest organizations submitted a FOIA request to the Department of State for records concerning aid provided to Mexico’s Instituto Nacional de Migracion. The coalition asked for a fee waiver and expedited processing. The agency denied the coalition’s request for expedited processing and a fee waiver. The coalition appealed the agency’s decision, which was upheld. The coalition then filed suit.
   Issues: Expedited processing, Public Interest Fee Waiver
7. CORNUCOPIA INSTITUTE v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (filed Feb 9, 2016)
   The Cornucopia Institute submitted a FOIA request to the Department of Agriculture for records concerning investigations conducted by the National Organic Program of three companies. The agency responded by providing records pertaining to two of the companies, but denied access to records concerning the investigation of the third company under Exemption 7(A) (ongoing investigation or proceeding). Cornucopia appealed the denial to the agency, but after hearing nothing further from the agency, Cornucopia filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
8. Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association v. United States Army Corps of Engineers (filed Feb 9, 2016)
   The Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association submitted a FOIA request to the Army Corps of Engineers for the Programmatic Biological Assessment for Shellfish Activities in Washington State Inland Marine Waters. The agency indicated that it would withhold the report under Exemption 5 (privileges). The Association appealed that decision, but after hearing nothing further from the agency, the Association filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
9. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION et al (filed Feb 10, 2016)
   The ACLU submitted FOIA requests to the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, and several other agencies for records concerning the government’s “Countering Violent Extremism” program. The ACLU also requested expedited processing and a fee waiver. Most of the agencies had not responded to the ACLU’s request, while others like the Department of Health and Human Services, had disclosed a handful of records. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence denied the request, which the ACLU appealed. Several other agencies indicated that they had found no records, which the ACLU also appealed. None of the requests were resolved by the time the ACLU filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees, Public Interest Fee Waiver
10. JAMES MADISON PROJECT et al v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE et al (filed Feb 11, 2016)
    The James Madison Project and investigative reporter Ken Dilanian submitted FOIA requests to the Department of Justice and the CIA for records concerning Mr. Kiriakou, a CIA officer who had publicly commented on waterboarding. He was prosecuted for disclosing information about a covert operative and pled guilty. All the requests asked for records concerning Kiriakou. At least one of JMP’s requests was administratively closed because it was considered duplicative, but after both agencies failed to respond, JMP and Dilanian filed suit.
    Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees