Mitchell v. Octapharma AG, No. 19-3610, 2019 U.S. Dict. LEXIS 83102 (C.D. Cal. May 16, 2019) (Anderson, J.)

Mitchell v. Octapharma AG, No. 19-3610, 2019 U.S. Dict. LEXIS 83102 (C.D. Cal. May 16, 2019) (Anderson, J.)

Re:  Request for research files and medical and billing records related to blood plasma donations involving Octapharma

Disposition:  Dismissing plaintiff's complaint

• Procedural Requirements, Entities Subject to the FOIA:  The court relates that "[t]he Court's Order to Show Cause provided Plaintiff with an opportunity to explain why his FOIA claims against Octapharma and Stafford Owens were not 'frivolous' for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) because neither entity appeared to be an 'agency' for purposes of FOIA."  "According to Plaintiff, '[w]hile the Defendants may not be an "agency" for purposes of FOIA, they are subject to FOIA and the Public Records Act when: (1) they act as an "agency;" and/or (2) they possess "public records."'"  The court finds that "Plaintiff cites no legal authority for this proposition and has neither alleged nor indicated that he can allege any facts that would qualify Octapharma and Stafford Owens as 'agencies' for purposes of FOIA."  "Instead, Plaintiff's effort to apply FOIA to Octapharma and Stafford Owens is contrary to . . . the plain language of FOIA . . . ."