Skip to content

Get Judicial Watch Updates!

DONATE

Judicial Watch • WorldNetDaily v DOJ 00549 Miriam Carey

WorldNetDaily v DOJ 00549 Miriam Carey

WorldNetDaily v DOJ 00549 Miriam Carey

Page 1: WorldNetDaily v DOJ 00549 Miriam Carey

Category:Legal Document

Number of Pages:5

Date Created:April 13, 2015

Date Uploaded to the Library:April 14, 2015

Tags:WND, Miriam Carey, police, justice, department, FOIA, Washington, court


File Scanned for Malware

Donate now to keep these documents public!


See Generated Text   ∨

Autogenerated text from PDF

Case 1:15-cv-00549 Document Filed 04/14/15 Page THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT COLUMBIA
WORLDNETDAILY.COM, INC.,
14501 George Carter Way
Chantilly, 20151
Plaintiff,
U.S. DEPARTMENT JUSTICE,
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.,
Washington, 20530-0001,
Defendant.
____________________________________)
Civil Action No.
COMPLAINT
Plaintiff WorldNetDaily.com, Inc. WND 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 WND independent news company incorporated under the laws
Delaware with place business located 14501 George Carter Way, Chantilly, 20151.
Defendant U.S. Department Justice agency the United States
Government and headquartered U.S. Department Justice, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue,
Case 1:15-cv-00549 Document Filed 04/14/15 Page
N.W., Washington, 20530-0001. Defendant has possession, custody, and control records which Plaintiff seeks access.
STATEMENT FACTS August 2014, Plaintiff sent FOIA request Defendant seeking access
the following public information: all materials used the investigation the Washington,
D.C. Metropolitan Police Department, and reviewed the U.S. Attorney Office for the
District Columbia, into the October, 2013 fatal shooting Miriam Carey uniformed
agents the U.S. Secret Service and officers the U.S. Capitol Police Department. Plaintiff
also requested the final report and findings that investigation.
The date range for this request from October 2013 August 2014. letter dated August 22, 2014, Defendant acknowledged receiving Plaintiff
request August 2014 and assigned the request number FOIA-2014-03711. August 26, 2014, Plaintiff sent email correspondence Sonja Whitaker
the U.S. Attorney Executive Office explaining that WND had requested exemption the
fees associated with its FOIA request, but that have problem paying any fees that may
arise, and would not like such matter impede the processing our request. letter dated September 17, 2014, Defendant denied Plaintiff request for fee
waiver reduction fees pursuant CFR 16.11. Defendant informed Plaintiff that
payment for accumulated charges, including duplication fees $0.10 per page after the first
100 pages which are free, would required before the agency would release documents.
10. letter dated October 2014, Defendant notified Plaintiff that was currently
searching for documents responsive your FOIA/PA request, and have reached the two
hours search time provided you charge. estimate that additional three hours
Case 1:15-cv-00549 Document Filed 04/14/15 Page
will required complete the search for the records you requested. $28 per hour,
Defendant estimated completion Plaintiff request would result fee for search time
$84.00. Additionally, Defendant noted that there was approximately two boxes and 100
compact disks that contain documents that are potentially responsive your request, noting that
duplication documents after the first 100 pages would charged $0.10 per page.
11.
Defendant informed Plaintiff that pursuant Department Justice Regulation
CFR 16.11(e), Plaintiff must agree pay anticipated fees amounting more than $25.00 before
Defendant would continue any further work Plaintiff request.
12. email correspondence dated October 2014, Plaintiff communicated
Defendant that [WND] would like obtain, and pay for, all documents that pertain [WND
request.
13. email correspondence dated October 2014, Defendant acknowledged
Plaintiff commitment pay the necessary fees.
14. email correspondence dated October 21, 2014, Plaintiff submitted completed
fee letter specifically indicating that agreed pay the search fee $84.00.
15. email correspondence dated October 21, 2014, Landis McEachin
(Contractor/Management Analyst II), FOIA Staff/EOUSA, CGI/Stanley Associates,
acknowledged receipt Plaintiff fee letter submission and stated that was sufficient
continue the search Plaintiff request.
16. email correspondence dated November 25, 2014, response Plaintiff
November 21, 2014 and November 24, 2014 inquiries into the status its FOIA request,
Defendant informed Plaintiff that its request was still pending and that Defendant will advise
you the status your request once hear back from the district.
Case 1:15-cv-00549 Document Filed 04/14/15 Page
17. email correspondence dated March 19, 2015, Defendant informed Plaintiff
that its request waiting assigned and processed paralegal are other requests that
are before yours.
18.
Defendant has failed provide Plaintiff with requested documents. has been
over eight (8) months since Plaintiff submitted its FOIA request and nearly six (6) months since
Defendant acknowledged and accepted sufficient Plaintiff commitment pay any and all
search fees and duplication charges related its request.
19.
Pursuant U.S.C. 552(a)(6)(A)(i), Defendant was required determine
whether comply with Plaintiff request within twenty (20) working days after receipt the
request and notify Plaintiff immediately its determination, the reasons therefor, and the
right appeal any adverse determination. Accordingly, Defendant determination was due
September 2014 the latest.
20. the date this Complaint, Defendant has failed to: (i) determine whether
comply with Plaintiff request; (ii) notify Plaintiff any such determination the reasons
therefor; (iii) advise Plaintiff the right appeal any adverse determination; (iv) produce the
requested records otherwise demonstrate that the requested records are exempt from
production.
21.
Because Defendant failed comply with the time limit set forth U.S.C.
552(a)(6)(A), Plaintiff deemed have exhausted any and all administrative remedies pursuant U.S.C. 552(a)(6)(C).
COUNT
(Violation FOIA, U.S.C. 552)
22.
Plaintiff realleges paragraphs through fully stated herein.
Case 1:15-cv-00549 Document Filed 04/14/15 Page
23.
Defendant violating FOIA unlawfully withholding records responsive
Plaintiff August 27, 2014 request.
24.
Plaintiff being irreparably harmed reason Defendant violation FOIA,
and Plaintiff will continue irreparably harmed unless Defendant compelled comply
fully with FOIA.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court: (1) order Defendant
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 the request and Vaughn index any responsive
records withheld under claim exemption; (3) enjoin Defendant from continuing withhold
any and all non-exempt records responsive the request; (4) grant Plaintiff award
attorney 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: April 14, 2015
Respectfully submitted,
JUDICIAL WATCH, INC.
/s/ Paul Orfanedes
Paul Orfanedes
D.C. Bar No. 429716
425 Third Street SW, Suite 800
Washington, 20024
(202) 646-5172
Counsel for Plaintiff