Pinson v. DOJ, No. 12-1872, 2015 WL 543706 (D.D.C. Feb. 10, 2015) (Contreras, J.)

Date: 
Tuesday, February 10, 2015

Pinson v. DOJ, No. 12-1872, 2015 WL 543706 (D.D.C. Feb. 10, 2015) (Contreras, J.)

Re: Requests for records concerning third party

Disposition: Granting in part and denying in part defendant's motion for summary judgment

  • Litigation Considerations, Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies:  "[The] Court grants the DOJ's motion for summary judgment as to [one request] because [plaintiff] 'failed to exhaust his administrative remedies before seeking judicial review.'"  The court finds that "[plaintiff] did not respond to the argument that he failed to exhaust his administrative remedies with respect to [this request]."  Additionally, the court finds that, "[l]ooking beyond [plaintiff's] opposition to his supporting declaration, [plaintiff] avers nothing suggesting that he disputes the DOJ's exhaustion argument."  "As a consequence, [the] Court finds that [plaintiff] has effectively conceded that he failed to appeal the USMS's decision and thus failed to exhaust his administrative remedies regarding [this request]."
     
  • Exemption 7(C): The court holds that, "because the DOJ has submitted a declaration contradicting the evidence it relies on in its motion, summary judgment is not appropriate."  The court relates that "the DOJ argues that [a third party's] signature on [a] Certification [of Identity] is inauthentic, and therefore that Section 7(C)'s exemption applies."  The court finds that "DOJ's own submissions offer two contradictory versions of the facts."  "Specifically, [one] Declaration asserts that [the third party's] signature on the Certification is inauthentic, while [another] Declaration seems to establish that [the third party's] signature is authentic."
Topic: 
District Court
Exemption 7C
Exhaustion
Litigation Considerations
Updated June 26, 2015