Skip to content

Get Judicial Watch Updates!

DONATE

Judicial Watch • Lovinger v DOD complaint 01914

Lovinger v DOD complaint 01914

Lovinger v DOD complaint 01914

Page 1: Lovinger v DOD complaint 01914

Category:

Number of Pages:5

Date Created:August 15, 2018

Date Uploaded to the Library:August 20, 2018

Tags:01914, Adjudications, Lovinger, Violation, orfanedes, privacy, determination, Dod, Defense, edward, complaint, Pentagon, responsive, defendant, michael, White House, filed, plaintiff, request, document, records, school, FOIA, Washington


File Scanned for Malware

Donate now to keep these documents public!


See Generated Text   ∨

Autogenerated text from PDF

Case 1:18-cv-01914 Document Filed 08/15/18 Page THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT COLUMBIA
ADAM LOVINGER
Plaintiff,
U.S. DEPARTMENT DEFENSE,
1400 Defense Pentagon
Washington, 20301,
Defendant.
Civil Action No.
COMPLAINT
Plaintiff Adam Lovinger brings this action against Defendant U.S. Department
Defense compel compliance with the Freedom Information Act, U.S.C. 552 FOIA
and the Privacy Act, U.S.C. 552a Privacy Act 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 Adam Lovinger individual.
Case 1:18-cv-01914 Document Filed 08/15/18 Page
Defendant U.S. Department Defense DoD Defendant agency
the United States government. DoD has possession, custody, and control records which
Plaintiff seeks access. DoD headquartered 1400 Defense Pentagon, Washington, 20301.
STATEMENT FACTS
Plaintiff civilian employee Defendant who served senior director
the White House National Security Council NSC from January May 2017. Before his
work the NSC, Plaintiff was strategic affairs analyst the Office Net Assessment the
Pentagon, where specialized issues related U.S.-India relations, the Persian Gulf, and
sub-Saharan Africa. Plaintiff also attorney and adjunct professor Georgetown
University Walsh School Foreign Service and McCort School Public Policy.
Before departing the Pentagon for the NSC, Plaintiff raised concerns about the
possible misuse contractors and waste taxpayer resources DoD. Months after Plaintiff
raised these issues, DoD suspended his security clearance and his detail the NSC was
cancelled. September 2017, Plaintiff filed whistleblower reprisal complaint against
Edward Fish, Adjudications Directorate Chief DoD Consolidated Adjudications Facility CAF and two Fish superiors. CAF determines the security clearance eligibility nonintelligence DoD personnel occupying sensitive positions and/or requiring access classified
material including Sensitive Compartmented information. December 15, 2017, Plaintiff submitted Privacy Act request CAF,
component Defendant, seeking:
Any and all emails similar electronic messaging transmissions referencing the
word Lovinger; whether the title body said communications(s); between
May 2017 and present; to, from, copied the following individuals:
-2-
Case 1:18-cv-01914 Document Filed 08/15/18 Page
Mr. Edward Fish, Director DoD CAF
Mr. Daniel Purtill, Deputy Director DoD CAF
Mr. Ronald Freels, Adjudications Directorate Chief. letter dated March 26, 2018, Defendant provided Plaintiff with final
determination. Defendant determination treated Plaintiff request both Privacy Act
Request and FOIA request.
10. the determination, Defendant informed Plaintiff had located pages
records responsive Plaintiff request but was withholding all pages their entirety
pursuant both FOIA and Privacy Act exemptions. Defendant also informed Plaintiff that
Fish, the individual against whom Plaintiff had filed whistleblower complaint, had been the
Initial Denial Authority who determined that the pages should withheld. Fish was
written notice Plaintiff whistleblower complaint against him when withheld the records.
11.
Defendant determination advised Plaintiff that could appeal the
determination under FOIA the appellate authority.
12. letter dated April 2018, Plaintiff administratively appealed Defendant
FOIA determination.
13. the date this Complaint, Defendant has failed issue determination
with respect Plaintiff administrative appeal concerning Defendant FOIA determination.
14.
Defendant also has refused comply with Plaintiff Privacy Act request.
COUNT
(Violation FOIA, U.S.C. 552)
15.
Plaintiff realleges paragraphs through fully stated herein.
16.
Plaintiff being irreparably harmed Defendant violation FOIA, and
Plaintiff will continue irreparably harmed unless Defendant compelled comply with
FOIA.
-3-
Case 1:18-cv-01914 Document Filed 08/15/18 Page
17. trigger FOIA administrative exhaustion requirement, Defendant was
required make determination with respect Plaintiff administrative appeal within the time
limits set FOIA. Accordingly, Defendant determination was due April 30, 2018.
18.
Because Defendant failed make determination, Plaintiff deemed have
exhausted its administrative appeal remedies. U.S.C. 552(a)(6)(C)(ii).
COUNT
(Violation Privacy Act, U.S.C. 552a)
19.
Plaintiff realleges paragraphs through fully stated herein.
20.
Defendant unreasonably refusing comply with Plaintiff Privacy Act
request.
21.
Plaintiff being irreparably harmed reason Defendant unlawful
withholding 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 searches for any and all records responsive Plaintiff request and demonstrate that
employed search methods reasonably likely lead the discovery records responsive
Plaintiff request; (2) order Defendant produce, date certain, any and all non-exempt
records responsive Plaintiff request and Vaughn index any responsive records withheld
under claim exemption; (3) enjoin Defendant from continuing withhold any and all nonexempt records responsive Plaintiff request; (4) grant Plaintiff award attorneys fees
and other litigation costs reasonably incurred this action pursuant U.S.C. 552(a)(4)(E)
and U.S.C. 552a(g)(3)(B); and (5) grant Plaintiff such other relief the Court deems just and
proper.
-4-
Case 1:18-cv-01914 Document Filed 08/15/18 Page
Dated: August 15, 2018
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Paul Orfanedes
Paul Orfanedes
D.C. Bar No. 429716
/s/ Michael Bekesha
Michael Bekesha
D.C. Bar No. 995749
JUDICIAL WATCH, INC.
425 Third Street S.W., Suite 800
Washington, 20024
(202) 646-5172
Counsel for Plaintiff
-5-