FOIA Activity: 7 New Procedural or Substantive Decisions

We have added 7 decisions of a procedural or substantive nature filed between August 28, 2016 and September 3, 2016. These are associated with 7 FOIA cases pending in federal district court. Note that because there can be delays between the date a decision is made and when it shows up on PACER, this listing includes only decisions that appeared on PACER during this period.

Click on the date to view the full text of the decision. Click on a case title below to view other details for that case, including links to the docket report and complaint.

1. DC 1:2014cv00483 — MCCLANAHAN et al v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

   • September 1, 2016: MEMORANDUM OPINION regarding the defendant's [25] Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell on September 1, 2016. (lcbah1)
2. DC 1:2016cv01584 — DONGKUK INTERNATIONAL, INC. et al v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

   • August 31, 2016: MEMORANDUM AND OPINION regarding [4] Plaintiffs' Motion for a Preliminary Injunction and [10] Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Amit P. Mehta on 08/31/2016. (lcapm3)
3. ID 1:2015cv00493 — Bettwieser v. Gans et al

   • August 31, 2016: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION – NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation entered on 5/2/2016 (Dkt. [27] ) is ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. [9] ) is GRANTED and the Complaint is DISMISSED as to ALL CLAIMS against HerschelHoward. Signed by Judge Edward J. Lodge. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (cjs) Modified on 9/1/2016 to correct filing date (cjs).
4. MIE 1:2016cv11555 — Donaldson v. AuSable Township

   • September 2, 2016: ORDER Denying Plaintiff's [38] Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by District Judge Thomas L. Ludington. (Sian, M)
5. NYE 1:2014cv00675 — Lorber v. U.S. Department of the Treasury

   • September 2, 2016: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: Before the Court is the March 9, 2016 Amended Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Vera Scanlon regarding Daniel Lorber's ("Plaintiff') Motion for Summary Judgment and the U.S. Department of the Treasury& #039;s ("Defendant") Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. Magistrate Judge Scanlon recommended that the Court deny Plaintiffs Motion and grant Defendant's Motion. For the following reasons, the Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Scanlon' s Report and Recommendation in its entirety. For the foregoing reasons, Magistrate Judge Scanlon's Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED in accordance with this Memorandum and Order. The Court DENIES Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment, and GR ANTS Defendant's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: (1) the Court permits Defendant to charge advance fees before releasing the remaining requested email records to Plaintiff; (2) the Court denies Plaintiffs request for attorney fees; (3) the Court declines to find that Defendant acted arbitrarily and capriciously; and (4) the Court enters judgment in favor of Defendant. Ordered by Judge William F. Kuntz, II on 9/1/2016. (Rodriguez, Lori)
6. NYS 1:2012cv04880 — Gelb v. Federal Reserve Bank of New York et al

   • August 29, 2016: OPINION AND ORDER: For the foregoing reasons, Gelb's remaining claim must be dismissed for lack of standing. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close this case. (Signed by Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr on 8/29/2016) (kgo)
7. NYS 1:2013cv08955 — Intellectual Property Watch et al v. United States Trade Representative

   • August 31, 2016: OPINION AND ORDER re: [90] MOTION for Reconsideration Pursuant to Rule 60(b) filed by William New, Intellectual Property Watch. Both Plaintiffs' and USTR's motions for summary judgment are denied at this time, and will b e revisited after USTR has the opportunity to make further submissions establishing that the information and advice contained in the withheld ITAC Communications were submitted in confidence. Once again, those additional submission are due on or befo re September 30, 2016, Plaintiffs' required response is due on or before October 31, 2016, and USTR's optional reply is due on or before November 14, 2016. Plaintiffs' Rule 60(b) motion is denied in substantial part, with the small exc eption of the six documents withheld solely because they contained proposals made by ITAC members. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motion, Doc. 90. It is SO ORDERED. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Brief due by 9/30/2016. Reply to Response to Brief due by 11/14/2016., Responses to Brief due by 10/31/2016) (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 8/31/2016) (kko)