Brown v. BOP, No. 19-2795, 2022 WL 2237217 (D.D.C. June 22, 2022) (Walton, J.)

Brown v. BOP, No. 19-2795, 2022 WL 2237217 (D.D.C. June 22, 2022) (Walton, J.)

Re:  Request for certain records concerning plaintiff's uncle and all policies that apply to handling of mail sent or received by inmates in the Communications Management Unit at Terre Haute Federal Correctional Institution

Disposition:  Granting in part and denying without prejudice in part defendant's motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, for summary judgment, and granting plaintiff's motion for leave to file his supplemental complaint

• Litigation Considerations, Pleadings:  "[T]he Court . . . turns to the parties' arguments regarding the plaintiff's FOIA claims, starting with the plaintiff's motion under Rule 15(d) for leave to file a supplemental complaint, including additional allegations relating to 'the constructive denial of a second . . . [FOIA] request.'"  "Specifically, the plaintiff's proposed supplemental complaint, claiming that the Bureau has yet to adjudicate his March 3, 2020 resubmitted FOIA request."  "The plaintiff argues that his proposed supplemental complaint contains allegations that are 'sufficiently related to the existing claims in this action because it is [a] part of [the Bureau]’s pattern of grossly exceeding the twenty-business-day timeline provided for by the statute for processing FOIA requests[.]'"  "Given that the Bureau has advanced no arguments in opposition to the plaintiff's request to supplement his Amended Complaint and because the Bureau's declaration does not address the substance of the FOIA request underlying the proposed supplemental allegations . . . the Court concludes that it should grant the plaintiff's request for leave to file his supplemental FOIA pleading."  "Furthermore, in light of the plaintiff's supplemental FOIA claim, the Court deems it premature to consider the Bureau's arguments regarding the totality of the plaintiff's FOIA claims until the record is complete."  "Thus, the Court agrees with the plaintiff that it would be 'in the interest of judicial economy[]' . . . to deny without prejudice the Bureau's motion—but only as to the plaintiff's FOIA claims."