Nikaj v. Dep't of State, No. 19-0496, 2019 WL 2602520 (W.D. Wash. June 25, 2019) (Coughenour, J.)
Date
Nikaj v. Dep't of State, No. 19-0496, 2019 WL 2602520 (W.D. Wash. June 25, 2019) (Coughenour, J.)
Re: Request for plaintiff's non-immigrant visa refusals
Disposition: Granting defendant's motion for summary judgment; denying plaintiff's motion for summary judgment
- Exemption 3: "[T]he Court finds that Exemption 3 was properly invoked to withhold release of all of the withheld documents." The court relates that defendant's point to the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. § 1202(f), which "prohibits the disclosure of material 'pertaining to the issuance or refusal of visas or permits to enter the United States . . . .'" The court finds that "Plaintiffs' [FOIA] request specifically asks for documents related to Plaintiff['s] . . . '2004, 2008, and 2014 non-immigrant visa refusals.'' "The FOIA request's own language requests documents that would fall squarely within 8 U.S.C. § 1202(f)." "And indeed, the Vaughn index's descriptions of documents withheld all pertain to the visas' denials."
- Exemption 6: "[T]he Court finds that [certain information was] properly partially withheld under Exemption 6." The court relates that "Plaintiffs appear to agree that redaction [of "the identifying information of law enforcement and consular officers"] was appropriate here."
- Exemption 7, Threshold: The court holds that "[t]he Government's determination about whether visa applications should be approved or denied, pursuant to U.S. immigration laws, is an administrative determination that has the 'salient characteristics of "law enforcement contemplated."'" Therefore, the court finds that "[t]he Government has shown that, in responding to Plaintiffs' FOIA request, its purpose fell within its sphere of INA enforcement authority and that the records were 'compiled for law enforcement purposes.'"
- Exemption 7(E): The court holds that "the Government has shown that [certain documents] were properly withheld . . . ." The court finds that "[t]he steps taken to assess visa eligibility are not well-known to the public, and the Government certifies such in the Vaughn index." The court finds that "[d]isclosure of the Government's visa application processes could lead to circumvention of the law because it could allow potential applicants to cover up damaging information."
Court Decision Topic(s)
District Court opinions
Exemption 3
Exemption 6
Exemption 7
Exemption 7(E)
Exemption 7, Threshold
Updated January 10, 2022