Skip to main content

Farah v. DOJ, No. 20-622, 2020 WL 5017824 (D. Minn. Aug. 25, 2020) (Tunheim, C.J.)


Farah v. DOJ, No. 20-622, 2020 WL 5017824 (D. Minn. Aug. 25, 2020) (Tunheim, C.J.)

Re:  Request for records concerning plaintiff's criminal case

Disposition:  Denying defendant's motion to dismiss

  • Litigation Considerations, Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies:  "[T]he Court will deny the DOJ's Motion pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) because [plaintiff] constructively exhausted his administrative remedies."  The court relates that "[t]he parties dispute whether DOJ may rely on [defendant's] alleged response [prior to the filing of this case] via the automated system despite the response not having been fully transmitted to [plaintiff]."  In denying defendant's motion, the court finds that "[plaintiff] attempted to contact DOJ twice to check on the status of his request, but DOJ did not return [plaintiff's] call."  'And at least one of these calls was placed days after the decision was allegedly relayed to [plaintiff]; a reasonable person in [defendant's] shoes would have listened to the messages, realized that [plaintiff] did not receive the decision, and called him back to resolve the issue."  "Indeed, had DOJ returned the call, it is unlikely that [plaintiff] would have filed this action."
  • Litigation Considerations, Pleadings:  The court relates that "Defendants argue in the alternative that the Court should dismiss [plaintiff's] Complaint or, at minimum, require [plaintiff] to amend his Complaint to reflect the current factual scenario and identify specific deficiencies in the now-received partial FOIA release."  "[Plaintiff] agrees that amendment is warranted, but argues against outright dismissal."  "The Court agrees that amendment provides the most efficient avenue to resolve this matter."
Court Decision Topic(s)
District Court opinions
Litigation Considerations, Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies
Litigation Considerations, Pleadings
Updated October 7, 2020