Due to the lapse in appropriations, Department of Justice websites will not be regularly updated. The Department’s essential law enforcement and national security functions will continue. Please refer to the Department of Justice’s contingency plan for more information.

Rodriguez v. DOJ, No. 16-5251, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 8129 (D.C. Cir. May 5, 2017) (per curiam)

Date: 
Friday, May 5, 2017

Rodriguez v. DOJ, No. 16-5251, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 8129 (D.C. Cir. May 5, 2017) (per curiam)

 

Re:  Request for certain records concerning requester's criminal case

 

Disposition:  Granting government's motion for summary affirmance; denying requester's motion to appoint counsel
 

  • Litigation Considerations, Appointment of Counsel:  The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit holds that "[i]n civil cases, appellants are not entitled to appointment of counsel when they have not demonstrated sufficient likelihood of success on the merits."
     
  • Litigation Considerations, Adequacy of Search:  The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit hold that "[t]he district court correctly determined that the government's search fulfilled its obligations under the [FOIA]."  "The affidavits submitted by the government describe 'what records were searched, by whom, and through what process,' . . . and adequately show 'that all files likely to contain responsive materials (if such records exist) were searched[.]'"  Additionally, the court finds that "[the requester] has failed to 'provide "countervailing evidence" as to the adequacy of the agency's search,' . . . and instead relies on 'speculation that as yet uncovered documents may exist[.]'"

 

Topic: 
Adequacy of Search
Appointment of Counsel
Court of Appeals
Litigation Considerations
Updated January 23, 2018