Mich. Immigrant Rights Ctr. v. DHS, No. 16-14192, 2020 WL 91539 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 8, 2020) (Goldsmith, J.)

Mich. Immigrant Rights Ctr. v. DHS, No. 16-14192, 2020 WL 91539 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 8, 2020) (Goldsmith, J.)

Re:  Request for records concerning interior enforcement operations in Detroit Sector

Disposition:  Denying plaintiffs' joint motion for interim award of attorney fees and costs

• Attorney Fees:  The court holds that "[the] considerations weigh against granting Plaintiffs' motion for interim fees."  "First, Plaintiffs have not demonstrated that a failure to award fees would impose a financial hardship or result in an inability to continue the litigation."  "Thus, the first factor weighs against awarding interim fees."  "Second, Defendants initially sought to delay the proceedings by suggesting a protracted production schedule extending over thirty-seven months."  "More recently, they sought to extend the production schedule due to their own carelessness in needlessly reviewing documents that were not producible, thereby having to extend the timeframe for producing the remaining documents that were producible."  "The second factor weighs in favor of awarding interim fees."  "Third, this case has been pending for three years – which is not a protracted duration in comparison to other FOIA cases in which interim fees have been denied."  "The third factor, therefore, weighs against awarding interim fees."  "Fourth, and most significantly, this case is near its conclusion, as the Court has ordered Defendants to make a final production no later than February 14, 2020."  "A motion seeking a final award of attorney fees and costs may be filed shortly thereafter."  "Because the goal line is in sight, there is less urgency for an interim decision, and the fourth factor weighs against awarding interim fees."  "Fifth, in determining whether a plaintiff is entitled to an award of attorney fees and costs in a FOIA action, 'district courts are directed to take into consideration the overall degree of a plaintiff's success . . . .'"  "At the present stage of the litigation, a determination of Plaintiffs' overall success would be premature."  "Deferring this evaluation would permit the Court to consider more comprehensively – against the backdrop of the entire litigation –the significance of the ultimate relief obtained by Plaintiffs."  "Finally, the parties' disputes with respect to Plaintiffs' entitlement to certain fees would likely resurface with respect to a motion for a final award of fees."  "Rather than make such determinations in piecemeal fashion, the Court elects to reserve ruling on these issues until the conclusion of the litigation."