Case Detail
Case Title | Ortega et al v. Treasury Department | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
District | Southern District of Texas | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
City | Houston | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Case Number | 4:2019cv01078 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Date Filed | 2019-03-22 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Date Closed | 2020-01-17 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Judge | Judge Sim Lake | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plaintiff | Saul Ortega | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plaintiff | David Rogers | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Case Description | Saul Ortega and David Rodgers, who were involved in an administrative proceeding brought by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency as the result of a bank failure, submitted a FOIA request to the Department of Treasury for records concerning a November 2018 document entitled Ratification of Administrative Law Judge Appointments. The agency acknowledged receipt of the request. The agency responded by providing 13 heavily-redacted pages. Ortega and Rodgers filed an administrative appeal of the decision, but after hearing nothing further from the agency, Ortega and Rodgers filed suit. Complaint issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Litigation - Attorney's fees | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Defendant | Treasury Department | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Documents | Docket Complaint Complaint attachment 1 Complaint attachment 2 Complaint attachment 3 Complaint attachment 4 Opinion/Order [18] FOIA Project Annotation: A federal court in Texas has ruled that the Department of Treasury properly withheld records pertaining to a ratification notice for the appointment of administrative law judges by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin as the result of the 2018 Supreme Court ruling in Lucia v. SEC, 138 S. Ct. 1044 (2018), holding that the appointment of the SEC's ALJs must comply with the Appointments Clause of the Constitution, under Exemption 5 (privileges). Two months after the Lucia decision was announced, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency reaffirmed that two ALJs at the Office of Financial Institution Adjudication had been properly appointed under the Appointments Clause. Saul Ortega and David Roberts, who were subject to a pending administrative proceeding, challenged the appointment of the two ALJs. To support their claim, Ortega and Robert submitted a FOIA request for records pertaining to Mnuchin's ratification. The agency disclosed five heavily redacted items, claiming both the deliberative process privilege and the attorney-client privilege. The unredacted portions of the records showed that Mnuchin had not selected the ALJs but that they had been properly appointed by the Comptroller General. After reviewing the records in camera, the court agreed with the agency's privilege claims. Ortega and Roberts argued that disclosing the redacted portions was in the public interest because they would show that Mnuchin had not selected the ALJs. The court found that was irrelevant and upheld the agency's claims, noting that 'plaintiffs have been shown the process by which [the two ALJs] were appointed as OCC ALJs. Thus, Plaintiffs have not been deprived of review of the nature and timing of the government's appointments."
Issues: Exemption 5 - Privileges - Deliberative process privilege - Predecisional, Exemption 5 - Privileges - Deliberative process privilege - Deliberative | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
User-contributed Documents | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Docket Events (Hide) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|