CABLE NEWS NETWORK v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION and 13 other new FOIA lawsuits, plus case descriptions

We have added 51 documents from 12 FOIA cases filed between June 2, 2019 and June 8, 2019. 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. CABLE NEWS NETWORK v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (filed Jun 4, 2019)
   Cable News Network reporter Katelyn Polantz submitted a FOIA request to the FBI for records concerning interviews conducted as part of the Mueller investigation. The agency acknowledged receipt of the receipt and told Polantz that her request qualified for unusual circumstances. After hearing nothing further from the agency, CNN filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
2. Gal v. United States Customs and Border Protection et al (filed Jun 3, 2019)
   Andreas Gal, a naturalized U.S. citizen working in the tech industry, submitted FOIA requests to U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for records concerning an incident in which Gal was detained by customs officials at San Francisco International Airport who tried to coerce him into providing password information for his cell phone and laptop. The agencies acknowledged receipt of the requests, but after hearing nothing further from either agency, Gal filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
3. CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (filed Jun 3, 2019)
   The Center for Biological Diversity submitted a FOIA request to the Department of the Interior for records concerning the agency’s interpretation of a provision pertaining to irrigation of lands contained in the Colorado River Basin Project Act. The agency acknowledged receipt of the request. After hearing nothing further, CBD informed the agency that it had failed to respond within the statutory time limit. After several further attempts to contact the agency pertaining to the status of its request were unsuccessful, CBD filed suit.
   Issues: Adequacy – Search, Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
4. Pro Publica, Inc. v. United States Food and Drug Administration (filed Jun 3, 2019)
   ProPublica submitted a FOIA request to the FDA for records concerning a series of 48 contracts which were listed by number. The agency acknowledged receipt of the request, but after hearing nothing further from the agency, ProPublica filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
5. Seife v. United States Environmental Protection Agency (filed Jun 3, 2019)
   NYU Journalism Professor Charles Seife submitted a number of FOIA requests to the EPA for records concerning the agency’s press policies. The agency acknowledged receipt of the requests. Seife filed administrative appeals of the agency’s failure to respond as well as the agency’s denial of expedited processing for several of his requests. However, after hearing nothing further from the agency, Seife filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
6. Pro Publica, Inc. v. United States Department of Homeland Security (filed Jun 4, 2019)
   ProPublica submitted FOIA requests to the Department of Homeland Security for records concerning named contracts awarded by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S Customs and Border Protection. The agencies acknowledged receipt of the requests. CBP told ProPublica that it was taking a 10-day extension of the statutory time limit for responding. However, after hearing nothing further from either agency concerning its requests, ProPublica filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
7. Ryan, LLC v. U.S. Department of the Interior et al (filed Jun 4, 2019)
   Ryan, LLC, an accounting firm with clients in the oil and gas industry, filed a reverse-FOIA suit against the Department of the Interior to prevent the agency from disclosing allegedly proprietary information about Ryan’s clients as part of the Inspector General’s investigation of royalty refund claims. The agency received a third-party request for the investigative file and after Ryan was unable to get the agency to commit to protecting is confidential information, Ryan filed suit to block disclosure of its records.
   Issues: Litigation – Reverse-FOIA – Confidential business information
8. LEOPOLD et al v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE et al (filed Jun 5, 2019)
   Buzzfeed reporter Jason Leopold submitted FOIA requests to the Department of Justice, ten components of the agency, and the National Security Agency for records concerning actions taken by Attorney General William Barr or Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein pertaining to the Mueller investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential election. The agencies acknowledged receipt of the requests, but after hearing nothing further from the agencies, Leopold filed suit.
   Issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
9. FRIENDS OF THE EARTH v. NATIONAL OCEANIC & ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION et al (filed Jun 5, 2019)
   Friends of the Earth submitted a FOIA request to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for records concerning applications or proposals for certain finfish aquaculture projects sent to the Sea Grant program. The agency acknowledged receipt of the request. The agency located 115 responsive records but withheld them under Exemption 4 (confidential business information). FOE filed an administrative appeal. The agency told FOE that its original description of the 115 responsive records was incorrect because it contained a mixture of applications and proposals. However, the agency found that some of the records were protected by Exemption 5 (privileges) and while fewer records were subject to Exemption 4 than originally thought, some portions of proposals were still protected by Exemption 4 as well. Arguing that the agency’s response to its administrative appeal did not constitute a final determination, FOE then filed suit.
   Issues: Litigation – Attorney’s fees
10. ENVIRONMENTAL AND ANIMAL DEFENSE v. U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE et al (filed Jun 6, 2019)
    Environmental and Animal Defense submitted a FOIA request to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for records concerning the proposed Forest Lakes Development Project by Classic Homes in El Paso County, Colorado. The agency acknowledged receipt of the request and disclosed a sampling of 12 documents to EAD. But after hearing nothing further from the agency, EAD filed suit.
    Issues: Adequacy – Search, Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees, Litigation – Vaughn index
11. Northwest Environmental Advocates v. United States Environmental Protection Agency (filed Jun 6, 2019)
    Northwest Environmental Advocates submitted a FOIA request to the EPA for records concerning NWEA’s 2013 petition to have the agency update Washington State’s criteria for toxics. The agency acknowledged receipt of the request. The agency then told NWEA that it had posted an interim response to its request on its website. The agency disclosed 1,041 pages in four sets. Although the agency did not indicate that it was withholding any information, NWEA found that information had been redacted on the basis of Exemption 5 (privileges) and Exemption 6 (invasion of privacy). NWEA filed an administrative appeal, but after hearing nothing further from the agency, NWEA filed suit.
    Issues: Adequacy – Search, Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees
12. Wang v. United States Department of Justice (filed Jun 7, 2019)
    Michael Wang submitted a FOIA request to the FBI for records concerning an investigation involving him. The agency acknowledged receipt of the request. Wang contacted the agency for an estimated completion date. The agency told him it would take 475 days to process his request. Wang then asked for expedited processing, telling the agency that he needed the records to defend his job as a police officer. The agency then told Wang that it had located 5,000 potentially responsive records and that fees would be incurred. Wang contacted the agency several more times for a completion date, but after hearing nothing further from the agency, Wang filed suit.
    Issues: Adequacy – Search, Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation – Attorney’s fees, Litigation – Vaughn index

In addition, we have added 4 documents from 2 cases, with earlier filing dates, that have recently appeared on PACER.

• Transgender Law Center et al v. United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement et al (filed May 31, 2019)
• DANIEL v. DIRECTOR OF FOIA OPERATIONS USCIS et al (filed May 29, 2019)