Viola v. DOJ, No. 16-1411, 2022 WL 971327 (D.D.C. Mar. 31, 2022) (Chutkan, J.)
Viola v. DOJ, No. 16-1411, 2022 WL 971327 (D.D.C. Mar. 31, 2022) (Chutkan, J.)
Re: Request for records concerning sentencing judge and FBI expert in plaintiff's mortgage fraud case
Disposition: Granting government's supplemental motion for summary judgment; denying plaintiff's motion to vacate, motion for judgment, and motion to take judicial notice
- Procedural Requirements, Searching for Responsive Records: "Here, with one exception, all Plaintiff's 'new' evidence was available before March 31, 2018 and June 6, 2019, when this court issued its prior rulings on the EOUSA search." "Moreover, even if the evidence were new, it does not support Plaintiff's position regarding EOUSA control over the MFTF records." "The Memorandum does not discuss federal control of MFTF records, but suggests that only local entities maintained the evidence." "Having offered no 'newly discovered' evidence and/or no relevant evidence that would support his position regarding the MFTF, he has failed to meet this burden to show that the EOUSA's search was inadequate."
- Exemption 7(A): "Plaintiff also challenged, for the first time, the FBI's reliance on Exemption 7(A), which relates to ongoing criminal investigations." "He contends that a search of the law computer in prison confirmed there were no pending appeals in the Cuyahoga County corruption cases." " First, contrary to Plaintiff's assertion, a review of the public docket in [one of the cases] reveals that the Sixth Circuit did not deny the habeas petition and the matter is indeed ongoing." "Second, DOJ's failure to file a reply brief is not fatal to its argument because it lawfully relied on other exemptions to withhold the requested records . . . and Plaintiff did not—in the original summary judgment briefing, briefing on the motion to reconsider or during the current round of briefing—respond to DOJ's argument that the other stated exemptions are sufficient to support withholding the records."