DAILY CALLER NEWS FOUNDATION et al v. INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE and 6 other new FOIA lawsuits

We have added 54 documents from 6 FOIA cases filed between November 6, 2016 and November 12, 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. DAILY CALLER NEWS FOUNDATION et al v. INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE (filed Nov 10, 2016)
   The Daily Caller News Foundation submitted a FOIA request to the IRS for records concerning the Clinton Foundation. The IRS administratively closed the request because the tax returns for a non-profit organization were publicly available without a FOIA request and because other information might be protected by Exemption 3 (other statutes). Daily Caller News Foundation filed an administrative appeal of the closure of its request, arguing that the agency was required to search for and process records other than the publicly available tax return. The agency denied Daily Caller News Foundation’s appeal, noting that the remaining information was protected as third-party tax return information and the disclosure specialist who processed the request had not actually denied any information. Cause of Action Institute submitted a FOIA request to the IRS on behalf of Daily Caller News Foundation for records on the Clinton Foundation. The agency acknowledged receipt of the request, but had not responded when the Daily Caller New Foundation and Cause of Action Institute filed suit.
   Issues: Adequacy – Search, Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
2. MicroTechnologies, LLC v. U.S. Small Business Administration (filed Nov 7, 2016)
   Microtechnologies, LLC submitted a FOIA request to the U.S. Small Business Administration for records concerning emails between SBA staff and Microtechnolgies or its founders. The agency disclosed several thousand pages, some of which were redacted or withheld under Exemption 5 (privileges). Microtechnologies filed an administrative appeal, but the agency had not resolved its appeal by the time it filed suit. Microtechnologies submitted a second FOIA request to the agency for records concerning responses to FOIA requests submitted by reporter Robert O’Harrow. After the agency failed to respond to Microtechnologies’ second FOIA request, the company filed suit on both requests.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
3. CAUSE OF ACTION INSTITUTE v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (filed Nov 8, 2016)
   Cause of Action Institute submitted a FOIA request to the Tax Division of the Department of Justice for those portions of two previous Cause of Action FOIA requests that had not been disclosed because they were non-responsive. The Tax Division indicated it found two responsive records and planned to release one record in full, but to redact portions of the second record under Exemption 3 (other statutes) and Exemption 5 (privileges). However, the Tax Division separated the second record into nine separate records, redacting only one of the records under Exemption 3 and Exemption 5 and redacting the eight other records as non-responsive. Cause of Action filed an administrative appeal, but after hearing nothing further from the agency, Cause of Action Institute filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
4. MACHADO AMADIS v. DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCY et al (filed Nov 9, 2016)
   Juan Luciano Machado Amadis submitted a FOIA request to the Drug Enforcement Administration for records concerning himself. The agency responded that it found no records and Amadis filed an administrative appeal. Amadis also submitted a FOIA request to the FBI for records concerning any criminal or drug trafficking records concerning himself. The FBI denied the request and Amadis filed an administrative appeal. Amadis submitted a third request to the Department of State for records concerning the revocation of his visa. The agency acknowledged receipt of the request. After hearing nothing further from any of the agencies, Amadis filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
5. WREN v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE et al (filed Nov 9, 2016)
   Dajuan Lamarr Wrenn, a federal prisoner, submitted a FOIA request to the DEA for records on a DEA agent involved in the investigation of Wren. The agency redacted information under Exemption 7(C) (invasion of privacy concerning law enforcement records). Wren filed an administrative appeal to the Office of Information Policy. OIP upheld the agency’s denial. Wren then filed suit.
   Issues: Exemption 7(C) – Invasion of privacy concerning law enforcement records
6. ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (filed Nov 10, 2016)
   EPIC submitted a FOIA request to the FBI for memoranda concerning the sharing of biometric and other identity-related data between the FBI and the Department of Defense. The FBI acknowledged receipt of the request, but after hearing nothing further from the FBI, EPIC filed an administrative appeal to the Office of Information Policy. OIP indicated it would not address EPIC’s appeal because no records had been withheld. The FBI then told EPIC it had found 35 responsive pages, but that those pages had to be referred to other agencies. EPIC then filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees, Litigation – Vaughn index, Public Interest Fee Waiver

In addition, we have added 1 document from 1 case, with an earlier filing date, that has recently appeared on PACER.

• Thomas v. Baldwin County Corrections Center et al (filed Nov 4, 2016)