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.

Islamic Shura Council of S. Cal. v. FBI, No. 12-55305, 2013 WL 3992123 (9th Cir. July 31, 2013) (per curiam)

Date: 
Wednesday, July 31, 2013
Re: Defendant's appeal of district court's order granting plaintiff's motion for sanctions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(c) Disposition: Reversing the order granting the motion for sanctions and vacating the order awarding fees
  • Attorney Fees:  The Ninth Circuit finds that "[t]he motion for sanctions should not have been granted."  The court notes that what plaintiff "fails to observe . . . is that [defendant] had already 'corrected' the challenged pleadings and provided all the information it was obligated to provide to the district court before [plaintiff] filed its motion for sanctions."  The Ninth Circuit states that, "no party now disputes . . . that [defendant] provided the district court with a complete and accurate account of the facts of this case during the in camera sessions."  The court finds that, "[plaintiff] moved for sanctions long after the district court had ruled on the adequacy of the government's eventual compliance with FOIA, and a fortiori after it had ruled [defendant]'s original response had been inadequate and misleading."  Therefore, "the motion for sanctions was made after 'judicial rejection of the offending contention,'" and, "[t]he motion for sanctions should not have been granted.
Topic: 
Attorney Fees
Court of Appeals
Updated August 6, 2014