FOIA Activity: 8 New Procedural or Substantive Decisions

We have added 8 decisions of a procedural or substantive nature filed between October 1, 2023 and October 7, 2023. These are associated with 8 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. AK 3:2022cv00283 — Schneider v. Britt

   • October 2, 2023: ORDER OF DISMISSAL & NOTICE OF STRIKE : This action is DISMISSED as frivolous and counts as a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Plaintiff's Motions at Docket [7] , [11] , [13] , and [14] are DENIED. Plaintiff's Motion at Docket [10] is GRANTED. Signed by Judge Joshua M. Kindred on 10/2/2023. (ANM, COURT STAFF)
2. ILN 1:2022cv05072 — Stevens v. United States Health and Human Services et al

   • October 2, 2023: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER signed by the Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly on 10/2/2023: For the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion and Order, the Court dismisses DOJ and DHS as defendants. The Court grants EOIR's motion for s ummary judgment [dkt. 39] with respect to the Joel Rubin request but grants Stevens's cross-motion for summary judgment [dkt. 42] against EOIR with respect to the Silvestre, Archie, Hoang, and Charpentier requests. The Court orders EOIR to cond uct a good-faith and reasonable search for all remaining records specifically identified in the June 2021 Silvestre request, the August 2021 Archie request, the March 2022 Hoang request, and the August 2022 Charpentier request. The Court directs EOI R to file a status report by October 23, 2023 with a proposed production schedule for responding to these requests. The schedule should take into account that the Charpentier request was filed as an expedited request; therefore, the production sched ule for that request should be a minimum of 1,500 pages of documents responsive to Stevens's FOIA request per month. The Court will then direct the parties to confer and submit a draft injunction order for entry (in Word format, to the undersig ned judge's proposed order e-mail address). The Court grants Stevens's motion for summary judgment [dkt. 42] against CBP with respect to the Underwood request but denies her motion with respect to the remaining claims against all defendant s. CBP is directed to file a status report by October 23, 2023 with a proposed production schedule for responding to the Underwood request. The Court will then direct the parties to confer and submit a draft injunction order for entry (in Word form at, to the undersigned judge's proposed order e-mail address). The Court notes that its partial denial of Stevens's motion for summary judgment does not mean the end of this case with respect to those requests. As explained, with respect t o the HHS Underwood request and the CBP Hoang request, disputes of material fact remain regarding whether the agencies responded. With respect to the remaining requests, the Court has denied Stevens's motion because she has not argued that the agencies are currently withholding records in violation of FOIA. If that is the case, relief may still be available, but Stevens must adequately explain (and provide evidence of) the agency's ongoing violation. The case is set for a telephonic status hearing on October 17, 2023 at 8:55 a.m., using call-in number 888-684-8852, access code 746-1053. The parties are directed to file by October 10, 2023 a joint status report that describes what claims remain in this case and what action is necessary to bring the remainder of the case to a conclusion. (mk)
3. ME 2:2023cv00325 — THE ESTATE OF MRS EVA R BUENAVENTURA v. EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT et al

   • October 2, 2023: REPORT AND RECOMMENDED DECISION re [1] Complaint. Objections to R&R due by 10/16/2023. By MAGISTRATE JUDGE JOHN C. NIVISON. (MFS)
4. ME 2:2023cv00358 — DOE 3 v. EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT et al

   • October 2, 2023: REPORT AND RECOMMENDED DECISION re [1] Complaint. Objections to R&R due by 10/16/2023. By MAGISTRATE JUDGE JOHN C. NIVISON. (MFS)
5. NYS 1:2021cv04702 — Bal v. U.S. Department of the Treasury

   • October 5, 2023: OPINION & ORDER: re: [54] MOTION to Dismiss filed by Charles Bishop, Jason E. Prince, U.S. Dept. of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control, Marshall Fields. For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' motion to dismiss under Ru le 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim is DENIED as to Claim IV and only to resolve Plaintiff's challenges to the redactions in documents already produced. Defendants' motion to dismiss is GRANTED in all other respects. The parties are di rected to meet and confer about Plaintiff's challenges to thewithholdings made by OFAC pursuant to FOIA and submit a joint status letter to the Court on or before November 1, 2023. The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to mail a copy of this Order to the pro se Plaintiff at the address listed on the docket. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang on 10/05/2023) (ama)
6. NYS 1:2021cv09519 — International Refugee Assistance Project v. United States Department of Homeland Security et al

   • October 4, 2023: ORDER OF DISMISSAL The Court having been advised by counsel's letter dated October 3, 2023 (Dkt. No. 52) that all claims asserted herein have now been settled, including the attorney's fees issue, it is hereby ORDERED that the above-entitl ed action be and is hereby dismissed and discontinued without costs, but without prejudice to the right to reopen the action within 60 days of the date of this Order if the settlement is not consummated. To be clear, any application to reopen must be filed within 60 days of the date of this Order; any application to reopen filed thereafter may be denied solely on that basis. Further, if the parties wish for the Court to retain jurisdiction for the purposes of enforcing any settlement agreement, they must submit the settlement agreement to the Court within the same 60-day period to be "so ordered" by the Court. Nothing herein prevents the parties from separately filing a stipulation and order of settlement with respect to the attorney's fees issue and a dismissal of the case. Any pending motions are moot. The Clerk is respectfully directed to close this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge James L. Cott on 10/4/2023) (jca)
7. NYS 1:2023cv01471 — Reclaim the Records et al v. United States Department of State

   • October 6, 2023: ORDER granting [19] Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File. The Application is GRANTED. The Government's motion for summary judgment is due October 24, 2023, Plaintiffs' opposition is due December 8, 2023, and the Government's reply, if any, is due January 8, 2024. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 19. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 10/6/2023) (vfr)
8. WAW 2:2021cv01166 — Stepien v. Spinrad et al

   • October 3, 2023: ORDER to Renote Cross-Motion Briefing Schedule. Plaintiff's Joint Reply in Support of Plaintiff's Motion and Opposition to Defendant's Cross Motion due 11/3/2023, Defendants' Reply in Support of Defendants' Cross Motion due 11/17/2023. Signed by Hon. S. Kate Vaughan. (SB)