Skip to content

Case Detail

[Subscribe to updates]
Case TitleAMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY et al
DistrictDistrict of Columbia
CityWashington, DC
Case Number1:2011cv01971
Date Filed2011-11-08
Date Closed2013-03-18
JudgeJudge James E. Boasberg
PlaintiffAMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL
DefendantUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
DefendantUNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES
Documents
Docket
Complaint
Complaint attachment 1
Complaint attachment 2
Complaint attachment 3
Complaint attachment 4
Complaint attachment 5
Complaint attachment 6
Complaint attachment 7
Opinion/Order [22]
FOIA Project Annotation: Judge James Boasberg has blasted U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for its poor handling of a FOIA request submitted by the American Immigration Council, but although he found the agency's work exceedingly sloppy, he also found that some of the agency's responses were appropriate. The Council asked for records concerning the role of counsel in immigration proceedings. After eight months without a determination, the Council filed suit. Three months later, USCIS responded by releasing 455 pages in full and 418 pages in part. The agency withheld 1169 pages. By the time Boasberg ruled on the case, he was able to confirm the agency's Exemption 6 (invasion of privacy) claims because the Council had not addressed them. But the Council's challenges to the search and to withholdings under Exemption 5 (privileges) remained. The Council challenged the way in which the agency selected the offices to be searched as well as the searches themselves. The agency explained that because the request was considered complex it was referred to the Significant Interest Team, which identified five offices to be searched. The Council argued the agency had failed to explain why it limited its search to only five offices and suggested that the Fraud Detection and National Security Directorate also dealt with access to counsel issues. But, calling the issue "close," Boasberg agreed that the agency's search criteria were adequate. He noted that "USCIS's methodologyâ€"comparing the FOIA request to program offices' functions deduced from 'sources containing organizational and operational information about the agency and its various components, such as a reference guide'â€"is sound. USCIS could justifiably conclude that the Fraud Detection and National Security Directorate probably did not hold responsive records because its functions seem far removed from access-to-counsel issues." But Boasberg then noted that "once the searches moved to the program offices, however, the [agency affidavit's] detail thins. [The agency] explains that each chosen program office 'was tasked to conduct a search for documents responsive to AIC's FOIA request.' [It] adds that each office 'conduct[ed] the search in the manner it deem[ed] most appropriate and best calculated to locate records responsive to the specific FOIA request.'" He continued: "And that's it. The [affidavit] says nothing about what kinds of records the offices keep, which records or databases the office searched through, or how the offices conducted their searches. Indeed [the writer of the affidavit] seems not to know what the chosen program offices did after receiving the requests. The [affidavit] says only that the chosen offices turned responsive records over to the Significant Interest Team." He observed that "[the agency's affidavit] gives this Court no way to know if the chosen offices conducted adequate searches with reasonable methods." As a result, he indicated: "The Court cannot yet say whether the search was adequate, but [the agency's affidavit] certainly was not." The Council next contended that "mostâ€"if not all" of the Vaughn index explanations for withholding records under Exemption 5 were conclusory. Boasberg was inclined to agree and, as a result, ordered USCIS to produce 15 contested records for in camera review. Criticizing the agency for submitting a Vaughn index riddled with mistakes, Boasberg indicated that "the errors in the form of the index turn out to be the least of USCIS's woes here. Having now examined the withheld records, the Court concludes that most of the challenged Exemption 5 withholdings were improper, although the reason that USCIS was wrong changes with each record. The variety in errors suggests that USCIS, although it invoked Exemption 5 often, did not grasp even the basic points of this Exemption." Looking first at claims of the deliberate process privilege, Boasberg pointed out that "a 'strong theme' of this Circuit's decisions on the deliberative-process privilege 'has been that an agency will not be permitted to develop a body of "secret law," used by it in the discharge of its regulatory duties and in its dealings with the public, but hidden behind a veil of privilege because it is not designated as "formal," "binding," or "final."' Yet USCIS repeatedly casts records as predecisional when they actually convey what the Agency's policy-makers have decided." Boasberg began to examine the records. Addressing PowerPoint slides for training agency employees about interacting with attorneys, he noted that "these training slides are neither predecisional nor deliberative. A training is not a step in making a decision; it is a way to disseminate a decision already made." He next examined a series of emails between USCIS employees and the liaison for the American Immigration Lawyers Association. He pointed out that "the e-mail chain begins with the liaison asking USCIS employees to clarify specific agency policies and practices, and follows with the employees' responses, which are meant to be distributed to lawyers in the AILA. Most of these e-mails are not 'inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters,' flunking the threshold requirement for Exemption 5." The next record consisted of two documents given to immigrants by USCIS. Boasberg observed that "both of these documents were distributed to the public, they (1) are not intra-agency or inter-agency records, thus failing Exemption 5's threshold requirement, and (2) represent settled USCIS policy, not fluid policy that still must congeal." As to another record informing employees about a new policy, Boasberg indicated that "by including a long list of employees on the e-mail, moreover, the supervisor seems to aim to inform many employees (not just the one in charge of posting the notice) about the new policy. On the other hand, because the e-mail precedes the posting, arguably the decision has yet to reach its final culmination. The e-mail, moreover, encourages employees to contact the supervisor with any questions about the policy. At the end of the day, the Court concludes that even if some facts suggest that the e-mail is predecisional, it is not deliberative. There is no hint that the supervisor is still weighing her options or wants feedback from the employees; asking if employees have questions is not the same as asking if they have suggestions." USCIS had also claimed the PowerPoint slides used to train employees about interacting with private attorneys were protected by the attorney-client privilege. But Boasberg pointed out that "because these slides are a communication for attorney to client (here, USCIS), they are confidential only insofar as they rest on confidential information obtained from the client. USCIS offers no explanation of what confidential client communications might underlie these slides, and the slides themselves do not hint at underpinning confidentialities. Nor should they, the slides were used for general trainings by USCIS lawyers, and such generally applicable legal advice will rest on none of the factual particularities conveyed in a typical confidential communication by a client."
Issues: Adequacy - Search, Exemption 5 - Privileges
User-contributed Documents
 
Docket Events (Hide)
Date FiledDoc #Docket Text

2011-11-081COMPLAINT against UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY ( Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 4616043611) filed by AMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Civil Cover Sheet)(rdj) (Entered: 11/09/2011)
2011-11-08Summons (2) Issued as to UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY. (rdj) (Entered: 11/09/2011)
2011-11-082NOTICE OF RELATED CASE by AMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL. Case related to Case No. 11-1972. (rdj) (Entered: 11/09/2011)
2011-11-153Summons Returned Unexecuted by AMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL as to All Defendants., RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed as to the United States Attorney. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney on 11/10/2011. ( Answer due for ALL FEDERAL DEFENDANTS by 12/10/2011.) (Magid, Creighton) (Entered: 11/15/2011)
2011-11-234RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed on United States Attorney General. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney General 11/14/2011. (Magid, Creighton) (Entered: 11/23/2011)
2011-11-235RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES served on 11/15/2011 (Magid, Creighton) (Entered: 11/23/2011)
2011-12-086NOTICE of Appearance by Marian L. Borum on behalf of All Defendants (Borum, Marian) (Entered: 12/08/2011)
2011-12-097MOTION for Extension of Time to Answer, Move or Otherwise Respond to Plaintiff's Complaint by UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (Borum, Marian) (Entered: 12/09/2011)
2011-12-12MINUTE ORDER granting 7 Motion for Extension of Time. Defendants shall respond to Complaint on or before 2/10/2012. Signed by Judge James E. Boasberg on 12/12/2011. (lcjeb3) (Entered: 12/12/2011)
2011-12-13Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendants shall respond to Complaint on or before 2/10/2012. (ad) (Entered: 12/13/2011)
2012-01-188MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice :Attorney Name- Beth Jennifer Werlin, :Firm- American Immigration Council's Legal Action Center, :Address- 1331 G Street, N.W., Suite 200, Washington, D.C. 20005. Phone No. - 202-507-7522. Fax No. - 202-742-5619 by AMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL (Attachments: # 1 Declaration Beth Jennifer Werlin, # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(Magid, Creighton) (Entered: 01/18/2012)
2012-01-18MINUTE ORDER granting 8 Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Beth Jennifer Werlin. Signed by Judge James E. Boasberg on 01/18/2012. (lcjeb3) (Entered: 01/18/2012)
2012-01-269NOTICE of Appearance by Beth Jennifer Werlin on behalf of AMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL (Werlin, Beth) (Entered: 01/26/2012)
2012-01-2610NOTICE of Appearance by Melissa E. Crow on behalf of AMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL (Crow, Melissa) (Entered: 01/26/2012)
2012-02-0911Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Dispositive Motion by UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (Borum, Marian) (Entered: 02/09/2012)
2012-02-09MINUTE ORDER granting 11 Motion for Extension of Time. Defendants shall respond to Plaintiff's Complaint on or before March 12, 2012. Signed by Judge James E. Boasberg on 2/9/2012. (lcjeb3) (Entered: 02/09/2012)
2012-02-10Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendants shall respond to Plaintiff's Complaint on or before 3/12/2012. (ad) (Entered: 02/10/2012)
2012-03-0912ENTERED IN ERROR.....Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Briefs by UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (Borum, Marian) Modified on 3/9/2012 (dr). (Entered: 03/09/2012)
2012-03-09NOTICE OF CORRECTED DOCKET ENTRY: re 12 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Briefs was entered in error at request of counsel, and will be refiled.(dr) (Entered: 03/09/2012)
2012-03-0913Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Briefs by UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (Borum, Marian) (Entered: 03/09/2012)
2012-03-09MINUTE ORDER granting 13 Joint Motion for Extension of Time to File. Defendants' dispositive motion will be due May 1, 2012; Plaintiff's Opposition will be due June 1, 2012; and Defendants' Reply will be due June 18, 2012. Signed by Judge James E. Boasberg on 3/9/2012. (lcjeb3) (Entered: 03/09/2012)
2012-03-09Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendants' Dispositive Motion due by 5/1/2012; Plaintiff's Opposition to Dispositive Motion due by 6/1/2012; Defendants' Reply to Opposition to Dispositive Motion due by 6/18/2012. (tg, ) (Entered: 03/09/2012)
2012-04-2414Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to file Defendants' dispositive motion by UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Borum, Marian) (Entered: 04/24/2012)
2012-04-25MINUTE ORDER granting 14 Consent Motion for Extension of Time: Any dispositive motion by Defendants shall be filed on or before 5/31/2012, Plaintiff's Opposition shall be filed on or before 7/2/2012, and Defendants' Reply shall be filed on or before 7/17/2012. Signed by Judge James E. Boasberg on 4/25/2012. (lcjeb3) (Entered: 04/25/2012)
2012-04-25Set/Reset Deadlines: Any dispositive motion by Defendants shall be filed on or before 5/31/2012; Plaintiff's Opposition shall be filed on or before 7/02/2012; And Defendants' Reply shall be filed on or before 7/17/2012. (ad) (Entered: 04/25/2012)
2012-05-0215MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice :Attorney Name- Michelle S. Grant, :Firm- Dorsey & Whitney LLP, :Address- 50 South Sixth Street, Minneapolis, MN 55402. Phone No. - 612-340-5671. Fax No. - 612-340-2868 by AMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Magid, Creighton) (Entered: 05/02/2012)
2012-05-02MINUTE ORDER granting 15 Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Michelle S. Grant. Signed by Judge James E. Boasberg on 5/2/2012. (lcjeb3) (Entered: 05/02/2012)
2012-05-3116MOTION to Dismiss, MOTION for Summary Judgment by UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (Attachments: # 1 Declaration, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit, # 4 Exhibit, # 5 Exhibit, # 6 Exhibit, # 7 Exhibit Vaughn Index)(Borum, Marian) (Entered: 05/31/2012)
2012-07-0217Memorandum in opposition to re 16 MOTION to Dismiss MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by AMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL. (Attachments: # 1 Statement of Facts Response to Defendants' Statement of Material Facts as to Which There Is No Genuine Dispute, # 2 Declaration Declaration of Beth Werlin, # 3 Exhibit Exhibit A to Declaration of Beth Werlin, # 4 Exhibit Exhibit B to Declaration of Beth Werlin, # 5 Exhibit Exhibit C to Declaration of Beth Werlin, # 6 Declaration Declaration of Matthew Farr, # 7 Exhibit Exhibit A to Declaration of Matthew Farr, # 8 Declaration Declaration of Elise Fialkowski, # 9 Exhibit Exhibit A to Declaration of Elise Fialkowski, # 10 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order)(Werlin, Beth) (Entered: 07/02/2012)
2012-07-1218Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 16 MOTION to Dismiss MOTION for Summary Judgment by UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (Borum, Marian) (Entered: 07/12/2012)
2012-07-12MINUTE ORDER: Defendants' 18 Consent Motion for Extension of Time to File a Reply is hereby GRANTED; Defendants shall file their reply on or before August 16, 2012. Signed by Judge James E. Boasberg on 7/12/12. (lcjeb4) (Entered: 07/12/2012)
2012-07-13Set/Reset Deadline: Defendants shall file their reply on or before 8/16/2012. (ad) (Entered: 07/13/2012)
2012-08-1519Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 16 MOTION to Dismiss MOTION for Summary Judgment by UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (Borum, Marian) (Entered: 08/15/2012)
2012-08-15MINUTE ORDER granting Defendants' 19 Consent Motion for Extension of Time: Defendants shall have until and including September 6, 2012, to file a Reply in this matter. Signed by Judge James E. Boasberg on 8/15/2012. (lcjeb3) (Entered: 08/15/2012)
2012-08-15Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendants Reply due by 9/6/2012. (tg, ) (Entered: 08/16/2012)
2012-09-0620REPLY to opposition to motion re 16 MOTION to Dismiss MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration, # 2 Exhibit)(Borum, Marian) (Entered: 09/06/2012)
2012-11-09MINUTE ORDER: By November 15, 2012, the Court ORDERS Defendants to produce to the Court, for in camera review, the fifteen documents listed on pages 15-18 of 17 Plaintiff's Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss and for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge James E. Boasberg on 11/9/2012. (lcjeb2) (Entered: 11/09/2012)
2012-11-09Set/Reset Deadlines: In-Camera Submission due by 11/15/2012. (tg, ) (Entered: 11/09/2012)
2012-11-2721ORDER granting in part and denying in part 16 Defendants' Motion to Dismiss and for Summary Judgment. Defendants' Motion is GRANTED as to the Second Cause of Action, which is DISMISSED AS MOOT. Defendants' Motion is GRANTED as to the portions of the Complaint relating to released records, which are DISMISSED AS MOOT. Defendants' Motion is DENIED as to the adequacy of Defendants' search. Defendants' Motion is DENIED as to Defendants' withholdings under Exemption 5 for (using the numbering of records on pages 15-18 of 17 Plaintiff's Opposition Brief): Records 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 12, and 15 in full; FOIA response pages 1904-06 of Record 10, except for the first two e-mails on page 1904; and Record 13 in full, except for the internal meeting minutes. Defendants must make all of those records and portions of records available to Plaintiff. Defendants' Motion is GRANTED as to other withholdings under Exemption 5 and all withholdings under Exemption 6. On or before December 13, 2012, the parties shall submit a joint proposed schedule for the remainder of the case. Signed by Judge James E. Boasberg on 11/27/2012. (lcjeb2) (Entered: 11/27/2012)
2012-11-2722MEMORANDUM OPINION to 21 Order. Signed by Judge James E. Boasberg on 11/27/2012. (lcjeb2) (Entered: 11/27/2012)
2012-11-28Set/Reset Deadline: On or before 12/13/2012, the parties shall submit a joint proposed schedule for the remainder of the case. (ad) (Entered: 11/28/2012)
2012-12-1323Joint MOTION for Briefing Schedule by UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (Borum, Marian) (Entered: 12/13/2012)
2012-12-13MINUTE ORDER granting 23 Motion for Joint Proposed Briefing Schedule. The Court ORDERS that: (1) Defendants shall file a renewed motion for summary judgment by March 13, 2013; (2) Plaintiff shall file its opposition by April 12, 2013; and (3) Defendants shall file any reply by April 29, 2013. Signed by Judge James E. Boasberg on 12/13/2012. (lcjeb2) (Entered: 12/13/2012)
2012-12-14Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendants shall file a renewed motion for summary judgment by 3/13/2013; Plaintiff shall file its opposition by 4/12/2013; Defendants shall file any reply by 4/29/2013. (ad) (Entered: 12/14/2012)
2013-03-1324Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment by UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (Borum, Marian) (Entered: 03/13/2013)
2013-03-13MINUTE ORDER granting Defendant's Consent 24 Motion for Extension of Time to File its Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court ORDERS that Defendant's renewed motion shall be filed on or before March 20, 2013. Signed by Judge James E. Boasberg on 3/13/2013. (lcjeb3) (Entered: 03/13/2013)
2013-03-13Set/Reset Deadline: Defendant's renewed motion shall be filed on or before 3/20/2013. (ad) (Entered: 03/13/2013)
2013-03-1525STIPULATION of Settlement and Dismissal by AMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL. (Grant, Michelle) (Entered: 03/15/2013)
2013-03-15MINUTE ORDER: For the reasons set forth in the parties' 25 Stipulation of Settlement and Dismissal, the Court ORDERS that the case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge James E. Boasberg on 3/15/2013. (lcjeb2) (Entered: 03/15/2013)
Hide Docket Events
by FOIA Project Staff
Skip to toolbar