Pinson v. DOJ, No. 12-1872, 2013 WL 5423107 (D.D.C. Sept. 30, 2013) (Contreras, J.)
- Amending the Complaint: The court orders plaintiff to amend his complaint to include a more definite statement of his claims against defendant. "The Plaintiff's complaints do not include any details about the type of information he seeks from the Defendants." "Despite bringing this suit concerning over 200 FOIA requests to Defendants, he provides almost no information about the requests." "Without providing this more definite statement of his claims, this Court lacks sufficient details to determine if the Defendants complied with their FOIA obligations."
- Procedural: The court denies plaintiff's motion for joinder of another party. "Even though the Plaintiff [and the third party] may have made similar types of FOIA requests to the Defendants, the Plaintiff does not include any facts in any of his complaints that reveal that the Plaintiff and [the third party's] FOIA requests arise out of the same incident or that the requests are in any way 'logically related' to each other."
- Proper Party Defendant: The court finds that "[p]laintiff's suit against the three defendants [who are BOP employees] is impermissible under FOIA and the Privacy Act." "The Plaintiff would not be entitled to relief under FOIA or the Privacy Act because the statutes only authorize a cause of action against agencies, not individuals."
- Vaughn Index: The court denies plaintiff's motion for a Vaughn Index at this stage. "[A] Vaughn index is not typically required until the Defendants must factually support a motion for summary judgment." "Because this case is not yet in a posture for dispositive briefing, the Plaintiff's motion is premature."