Due to the lapse in appropriations, Department of Justice websites will not be regularly updated. The Department’s essential law enforcement and national security functions will continue. Please refer to the Department of Justice’s contingency plan for more information.

Hicks v. Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, No. 13-0033, 2013 WL 6697935 (D.D.C. December 20, 2013) (Huvelle, J.)

Friday, December 20, 2013
Re: Request for all "fact witness vouchers" issued for plaintiff's criminal case Disposition: Granting defendant's motion for summary judgment
  • Exemption 7(C):  The court holds that "[s]ince plaintiff does not dispute defendant's justification for withholding third-party information under exemption 7(C), the Court will grant summary judgment to defendant on its proper invocation of this exemption."
  • Procedural Requirements, Searching for Responsive Records:  The court notes that "[p]laintiff has not seriously disputed that the foregoing search was adequate, but he seems to suggest that the declarant overlooked certain information."  The court holds that "[p]laintiff's argument is based on a misguided premise about defendant's disclosure obligations."  The court explains that "[a]n agency is required to disclose only 'records 'written or transcribed [that] perpetuate knowledge or events' ... [the] FOIA neither requires an agency to answer questions disguised as a FOIA request, [n]or to create documents or opinions in response to an individual's request for information.'"  The court also holds that "the fact that the Marshals Service may have responsive records places no obligation on EOUSA to retrieve them."  "Plaintiff is free to submit a FOIA request directly to the Marshals Service in accordance with the forgoing regulation."
District Court
Exemption 7C
Updated August 6, 2014