Skip to content

Get Judicial Watch Updates!


Judicial Watch • JW v DOJ Amended Complaint 01510

JW v DOJ Amended Complaint 01510

JW v DOJ Amended Complaint 01510

Page 1: JW v DOJ Amended Complaint 01510


Number of Pages:4

Date Created:October 1, 2012

Date Uploaded to the Library:August 01, 2014

Tags:01510, Obama, DOJ

File Scanned for Malware

Donate now to keep these documents public!

See Generated Text   ∨

Autogenerated text from PDF

Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 12-1510 (JDB) 
 Plaintiff Judicial Watch, Inc. brings this action against Defendant U.S. Department Justice compel compliance with the Freedom Information Act, U.S.C.  552 (FOIA). grounds therefor, Plaintiff alleges follows: 
JURISDICTION AND VENUE The Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant U.S.C.  552(a)(4)(B) and U.S.C.  1331. Venue proper this district pursuant U.S.C.  1391(e). 
PARTIES  Plaintiff Judicial Watch, Inc. not-for-profit, educational foundation organized under the laws the District Columbia and having its principal place business 425 Third Street, S.W., Suite 800, Washington,  20024.  Plaintiff seeks promote integrity, transparency, and accountability government and fidelity the rule law. furtherance its public interest mission, Judicial Watch regularly requests access records federal, state, and local government agencies and officials and disseminates its findings the public. Defendant agency the U.S. Government and headquartered 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, 20530-0001.  Defendant has possession, custody, and control records which Plaintiff seeks access. 
STATEMENT FACTS June 22, 2012, Plaintiff submitted FOIA request the Office Information Policy (OIP), component Defendant, seeking access copies the following records: 
All records subject the claim executive privilege invoked President Barack Obama about June 20, 2012, referenced the letter Deputy Attorney General James Cole the Honorable Darrell Issa, Chairman, Committee Oversight and Government Reform the U.S. House Representatives, dated June 20, 2012.  More specifically, the records requested herein are those records described Deputy Attorney General Cole his June 20, 2012 letter the relevant post-February, 2011, documents over which the President has asserted executive privilege. letter dated August 2012, OIP informed Plaintiff that determination had been made withhold records responsive Plaintiffs FOIA request full pursuant FOIA Exemption citing the Presidents assertion executive privilege.  OIP also informed Plaintiff that Plaintiff had the right file administrative appeal this determination within days.  OIP did not indicate that search for responsive records had been conducted.  Nor did state how many responsive records were being withheld from Plaintiff. letter dated August 2012, Plaintiff administratively appealed the August 2012 determination. two separate letters dated August 16, 2012, the Administrative Appeals Staff OIP notified Plaintiff that had received Plaintiffs administrative appeal August 13, 2012.  OIP did not state whether determination had been made with respect Plaintiffs administrative 
appeal.  Nor did OIP inform Plaintiff any such determination notify Plaintiff the right seek judicial review. Pursuant U.S.C.  552(a)(6)(A)(ii), OIP was required make determination with respect Plaintiffs administrative appeal within twenty (20) working days OIPs receipt the appeal, September 11, 2012. 
 10. the close business September 12, 2012, Plaintiff had not received determination from OIP with respect Plaintiffs administrative appeal.  Plaintiff filed its Complaint this matter that date. 
 11. September 13, 2012, Plaintiff received, mail, letter from OIP concerning Plaintiffs administrative appeal.  The letter was dated September 11, 2012, but the envelope which the letter had been mailed was postmarked September 12, 2012. 
 12. its letter, OIP informed Plaintiff that, pursuant U.S.C. 552(a)(6)(B)(i)-(iii), had extended ten (10) additional working days the date for making determination with respect Plaintiffs administrative appeal.  Accordingly, OIPs determination with respect the appeal was due before September 25, 2012.   
 13. date, Plaintiff has not received OIPs determination with respect Plaintiffs administrative appeal.  
14. Because OIP has failed comply with the time limits set forth U.S.C. 552(a)(6)(A)(ii) and U.S.C. 552(a)(6)(B)(i), Plaintiff deemed have exhausted any and all administrative remedies with respect its FOIA request, pursuant U.S.C. 552(a)(6)(C). 
(Violation FOIA, U.S.C.  552) 
 15. Plaintiff realleges paragraphs through fully stated herein. 
 16. Defendant unlawfully withholding records requested Plaintiff pursuant U.S.C.  552. 
 17. Plaintiff being irreparably harmed reason Defendants unlawful withholding the requested records, and Plaintiff will continue irreparably harmed unless Defendant compelled conform its conduct the requirements the law. 
 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court: (1) order Defendant conduct search for any and all records responsive Plaintiffs FOIA request and demonstrate that employed search methods reasonably likely lead the discovery records responsive Plaintiffs FOIA request; (2) order Defendant produce, date certain, any and all non-exempt records responsive Plaintiffs FOIA request and Vaughn index any responsive records withheld under claim exemption; (3) enjoin Defendant from continuing withhold any and all non-exempt records responsive Plaintiffs FOIA request; (4) grant Plaintiff award attorneys fees and other litigation costs reasonably incurred this action pursuant U.S.C.  
 552(a)(4)(E); and (5) grant Plaintiff such other relief the Court deems just and proper. 
Dated:  October 2012    Respectfully submitted, 
       /s/ Paul Orfanedes   
       D.C. Bar No. 429716 
       /s/ Michael Bekesha  
       D.C. Bar No. 995749 
425 Third Street, S.W., Suite 800 
Washington, 20024 
(202) 646-5172 
Counsel for Plaintiff