United States v. Datta, No. 11-0102, 14-8653, 2024 LEXIS 21026 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 2, 2024) (Kaplan, J.)

United States v. Datta, No. 11-0102, 14-8653, 2024 LEXIS 21026 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 2, 2024) (Kaplan, J.)

Re:  Requests for records concerning plaintiff’s criminal case

Disposition:  Denying plaintiff’s application

• Litigation Considerations, Pleadings; Procedural Requirements, Entities Subject to the FOIA:  The court relates that “[plaintiff] now purports to move pursuant to the [FOIA] – both in the long-since completed criminal case and in a now concluded civil docket . . . ‘for clarification & solicitation of the records supporting jurisdiction of the government to prosecute the petitioner and ruling(s) of the honorable court[]’ . . . .”  The court finds that, “[f]irst, neither of the cases in which [plaintiff] has filed this purported action remain pending.”  “If he wishes to file an action for relief under FOIA, he must commence a new civil action in an appropriate venue and, absent in forma pauperis relief, pay the requisite filing fee.”  “Second, the clarification and records [plaintiff] purports to seek would be from the court.”  “A FOIA request, however, must be directed to an ‘agency’ of the United States government.”  “The statutory definition of ‘agency’ specifically and explicitly excludes ‘the courts of the United States.’”