2450 Exhaustion of administrative rem- Klein v. Civiletti ...2450 Exhaustion of administrative rem- Klein v. Civiletti ... ... edies
Post on 24-Jan-2020
5 Views
Preview:
Transcript
- 172 -
2450 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies
Klein v. Civiletti, 3 GDS ¶83,155 (D.D.C. 1980).
2451 Duty to search Kleinbart v. Sec'y, HEW, 1 GDS ¶80,062 (D.D.C.1980).
2452 No record within scope of request Kleinerman v. United States Patent & TrademarkOffice, No. 82-0295, 1983 WL 658 (D. Mass. Apr.25, 1983).
2453 (b)(4), (b)(5), deliberative process,pro se litigant, Vaughn Index
Kleinerman v. United States Postal Serv., No. 81-0357 (D. Mass. June 12, 1984).
2454 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, in camera in-spection
Kline v. Republic of El Sal., No. 83-2917 (D.D.C.Feb. 18, 1986).
2455 No record within scope of request Klinge v. IRS, 906 F. Supp. 434 (W.D. Mich. 1995).
2456 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(a), (b)(5),(b)(7)(E), deliberative process,duty to search, in camera inspec-tion, summary judgment, VaughnIndex
Klunzinger v. IRS, 27 F. Supp. 2d 1015 (W.D. Mich.1998).
2457 (b)(5), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), as-surance of confidentiality
K.M.G. Constr. Co. v. Dep't of Labor, No. 86-3278(D. Mass. May 5, 1987).
2458 (b)(3), 50 U.S.C. §403(d)(3) Knight v. CIA, 872 F.2d 660 (5th Cir. 1989), cert.denied, 494 U.S. 1004 (1990).
2459 (b)(2), (b)(4), (b)(5), attorney-client privilege, attorney work-product privilege, deliberativeprocess
Knight v. DOD, No. 87-0480 (D.D.C. Dec. 7,1987), partial summary judgment granted (D.D.C.Feb. 11, 1988).
2460 (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), exceptionalcircumstances/due diligence, ex-haustion of administrative reme-dies, pro se litigant, summary judg-ment
Knight v. FBI, No. 3-88-517 (D. Minn. Jan. 8, 1990)(magistrate's recommendation), adopted (D. Minn.Jan. 30, 1990).
2461 Duty to search Knight v. FDA, 938 F. Supp. 710 (D. Kan. 1996),renewed motion for summary judgment granted, No.95-4097, 1997 WL 109971 (D. Kan. Feb. 11, 1997).
2462 (a)(4)(C), (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E), (b)(7)(F),attorney's fees, "Glomar" denial, incamera affidavit, jurisdiction, sum-mary judgment, Vaughn Index
Knight Publ'g Co. v. DOJ, 608 F. Supp. 747 (W.D.N.C. 1984), motion for protective order denied, No.C-C-84-510 (W.D.N.C. Jan. 3, 1985), on motion forin camera inspection (W.D.N.C. Feb. 27, 1985),subsequent decision (W.D.N.C. Mar. 28, 1985),summary judgment granted (W.D.N.C. Dec. 18,1985).
2463 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies
Knight's, Inc. v. EEOC, No. C-85-232 (E.D. Ark.Oct. 8, 1986).
2464 (b)(5), deliberative process, sum-mary judgment
Knowles v. Thornburgh, No. 90-1294 (D.D.C. Mar.11, 1992).
- 173 -
2465 Fees (Reform Act) Knowles v. United States Coast Guard, No. 96-1018, 1997 WL 151397 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 31, 1997).
2466 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies
Knox v. United States, No. 89-0548 (D.D.C. Apr.21, 1989).
2467 (a)(1)(D), publication Knutzen v. Eben Ezer Lutheran Hous. Ctr., 815 F.2d1343 (10th Cir. 1987).
2468 (b)(5), (b)(7), deliberative process,law enforcement purpose
Koch v. DOJ, 376 F. Supp. 313 (D.D.C. 1974).
2469 (b)(7), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), as-surance of confidentiality, law en-forcement amendments (1986),law enforcement purpose, sum-mary judgment
Koch v. United States Postal Serv., No. 92-0233(W.D. Mo. Dec. 17, 1992), aff'd, No. 93-1487, 1993WL 394629 (8th Cir. Oct. 8, 1993) (unpublishedmemorandum), 7 F.3d 1042 (8th Cir. 1993) (tablecite).
2470 Jurisdiction Koff v. Comm'r, No. S93-125 (E.D. Cal. June 30,1993).
2471 Attorney's fees Kohn v. FBI, 581 F. Supp. 48 (D. Mass. 1984).
2472 (b)(5), deliberative process, sum-mary judgment
Kooritzky v. Martin, No. 92-1271 (D.D.C. Nov. 10,1992), summary affirmance granted sub nom. Koori-tzky v. Reich, No. 92-5442 (D.C. Cir. May 25,1993).
2473 (b)(1), (b)(3), (b)(5), (b)(6),(b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C), duty tosearch, in camera inspection, stat-us of plaintiff, summary judgment
Korkala v. CIA, No. 87-1035 (D.D.C. Mar. 15,1990).
2474 (b)(7), (b)(7)(A), law enforcementamendments (1986), law enforce-ment purpose, summary judgment,Vaughn Index
Korkala v. DOJ, No. 86-0242 (D.D.C. July 31,1987).
2475 Privacy Act access, (b)(3), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e)
Kotmair v. DOJ, No. 94-721 (D. Md. July 12, 1994),aff'd, 42 F.3d 1386 (4th Cir. 1994) (per curiam).
2476 Privacy Act access, exhaustion ofadministrative remedies, failure tomeet time limits
Kotmair v. IRS, 47 A.F.T.R. 2d 81-985, 2 GDS ¶81,122 (D. Md. 1981).
2477 Duty to search Kowalczyk v. DOJ, 73 F.3d 386 (D.C. Cir. 1996).
2478 Privacy Act access, (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E)
Kowalczyk v. O'Brien, No. 94-1333 (D.D.C. Jan. 30,1996).
2479 Privacy Act access, (b)(7)(A),FOIA/PA interface
Kowalski v. FBI, No. 84-5035 (S.D. Ill. Oct. 9,1984).
2480 (b)(1), failure to meet time limits,waiver of exemption
Kownacki v. Draper, 3 GDS ¶82,539 (N.D. Cal.1982).
2481 (b)(1), (b)(7), (b)(7)(D), VaughnIndex
Kozol v. FBI, No. 84-3707 (D. Mass. May 30, 1986).
- 174 -
2482 (b)(7)(A), declaratory relief, moot-ness
Kramer v. Antitrust Div., DOJ, 40 Ad. L. 2d (P &F) 7 (D.D.C. 1976), aff'd, 559 F.2d 187 (D.C. Cir.1977).
2483 (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6), in camerainspection
Kreindler v. Dep't of the Navy, 363 F. Supp. 611(S.D.N.Y. 1973), on motion for summary judgment,372 F. Supp. 333 (S.D.N.Y. 1974).
2484 (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), FOIA as adiscovery tool
Kreitlow v. DOJ, No. 80-2754 (D.D.C. Oct. 6,1981).
2485 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies, fees (Reform Act)
Krese v. Executive Office of the President, No. 99-2415, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14024 (D.D.C. Sept.25, 2000).
2486 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, (b)(3), 50U.S.C. §403(d)(3), (b)(5), attor-ney's fees, deliberative process,duty to search, reasonably segre-gable, summary judgment
Krikorian v. Dep't of State, No. 88-3419 (D.D.C.Dec. 19, 1990), aff'd in part & remanded in part,984 F.2d 461 (D.C. Cir. 1993), attorney's fees de-nied (D.D.C. May 12, 1995), summary affirmancegranted, No. 95-5216 (D.C. Cir. Feb. 6, 1996).
2487 FOIA/PA interface Krohn v. DOJ, No. 78-1536 (D.D.C. Mar. 19,1984), vacated (D.D.C. Nov. 29, 1984).
2488 (b)(5), (b)(7)(C), adequacy ofagency affidavit, agency records,discovery/FOIA interface, duty tosearch, Vaughn Index
Krohn v. DOJ, 2 GDS ¶82,155 (D.D.C. 1981).
2489 (b)(5), in camera inspection Krohn v. DOJ, No. 78-1535 (D.D.C. Aug. 27,1979).
2490 Adequacy of request, duty tocreate a record, no record withinscope of request
Krohn v. DOJ, No. 78-1311 (D.D.C. July 6, 1979),aff'd, 628 F.2d 195 (D.C. Cir. 1980).
2491 (b)(1), E.O. 12065, (b)(3), 28U.S.C. §534, Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e),(b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(7)(A),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E),adequacy of agency affidavit, as-surance of confidentiality, attorneywork-product privilege, fees, feewaiver, in camera inspection, waiv-er of exemption (administrativerelease)
Krohn v. DOJ, 3 GDS ¶83,120 (D.D.C. 1979), sub-sequent decision, 1 GDS ¶80,053 (D.D.C. 1980),summary judgment granted, No. 79-0667 (D.D.C.Mar. 19, 1984).
2492 (b)(3), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e), (b)(5),attorney work-product privilege,duty to search
Kronberg v. DOJ, 875 F. Supp. 861 (D.D.C. 1995),summary judgment granted, No. 92-2736 (D.D.C.Mar. 25, 1996).
2493 (b)(3), 50 U.S.C. §403, §403-3(c)(5), Vaughn Index
Kronisch v. United States, No. 83-2458, 1995 WL303625 (S.D.N.Y. May 18, 1995), aff'd in part, va-cated & remanded in part on other grounds, 150F.3d 112 (2d Cir. 1998).
2494 Judicial records Kros v. DOJ, 2 GDS ¶82,138 (D. Conn. 1980).
2495 Attorney's fees, no record withinscope of request
Kruger v. Carlson, No. 86-2451 (D.D.C. Feb. 27,1987).
- 175 -
2496 Attorney's fees Kruger v. IRS, No. S-00-877, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS3323 (D. Nev. Feb. 5, 2001).
2497 Attorney's fees, mootness Kruger v. IRS, No. 99-347, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS15520 (D. Nev. Aug. 19, 1999).
2498 (b)(3), 49 U.S.C. §1504 Kruh v. GSA, 421 F. Supp. 965 (E.D.N.Y. 1976).
2499 (b)(1), E.O. 11652 Kruh v. GSA, 64 F.R.D. 1 (E.D.N.Y. 1974).
2500 (b)(2), (b)(5), (b)(6), deliberativeprocess, summary judgment, waiv-er of exemption
KTVK-TV v. DEA, No. 87-379, 1989 U.S. Dist.LEXIS 10348 (D. Ariz. Aug. 30, 1989).
2501 (b)(2), (b)(7), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), assurance of confiden-tiality, law enforcement amend-ments (1986), law enforcementpurpose, waiver of exemption
KTVY-TV v. United States, No. 87-1432 (W.D.Okla. May 4, 1989), aff'd, 919 F.2d 1465 (10th Cir.1990).
2502 Adequacy of request, exhaustionof administrative remedies
Kubany v. Bd. of Governors of the Fed. Reserve Sys.,No. 93-1428 (D.D.C. July 19, 1994).
2503 Privacy Act access, (b)(1), (b)(2),(b)(3), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), ade-quacy of agency affidavit, duty tosearch, no improper withholding,Vaughn Index
Kucernak v. FBI, No. 93-230 (D. Ariz. Oct. 9,1996), aff'd, No. 96-17143, 1997 WL 697377 (9th
Cir. Nov. 6, 1997) (unpublished memorandum), 129F.3d 126 (9th Cir. 1997) (table cite), cert. denied,523 U.S. 1051 (1998).
2504 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies
Kuchta v. Harris, No. 92-1121, 1993 WL 87705 (D.Md. Mar. 25, 1993).
2505 (b)(2), (b)(7), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), law enforcement pur-pose, Vaughn Index
Kuehnert v. Webster, 472 F. Supp. 362 (E.D. Mo.1979), aff'd in part, rev'd in part & remanded, 620F.2d 662 (8th Cir. 1980).
2506 (b)(2), (b)(6), (b)(7), (b)(7)(A),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), attorney'sfees, exceptional circumstances/due diligence, law enforcementamendments (1986), law enforce-ment purpose, no record withinscope of request
Kuffel v. Bureau of Prisons, No. 93-2366 (D.D.C.Jan. 27, 1995), amended, 882 F. Supp. 1116 (D.D.C. 1995).
2507 Attorney's fees Kulbicki v. FBI, No. 1:01-43 (D. Md. June 13,2001).
2508 (b)(4), FOIA as a discovery tool,jurisdiction, proper party defend-ant
Kurz-Kasch, Inc. v. DOD, 113 F.R.D. 147 (S.D.Ohio 1986), summary judgment granted, 688 F.Supp. 311 (S.D. Ohio 1987).
2509 (b)(6), adequacy of agency affida-vit, summary judgment
Kurzon v. HHS, No. 00-395, 2001 WL 821531 (D.N.H. July 17, 2001).
2510 (b)(6) Kurzon v. HHS, 649 F.2d 65 (1st Cir. 1981).
2511 (b)(7), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), as-surance of confidentiality, law en-forcement purpose, waiver of ex-emption
Kuzma v. FBI, No. 84-481 (W.D.N.Y. Nov. 29,1985).
- 176 -
2512 (b)(5), (b)(7), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), assurance of confiden-tiality, attorney's fees, deliberativeprocess, displacement of FOIA, incamera affidavit, law enforcementpurpose, mootness, waiver of ex-emption
Kuzma v. IRS, No. 81-600 (W.D.N.Y. Dec. 31,1984), aff'd, 775 F.2d 66 (2d Cir. 1985), costsawarded (W.D.N.Y. July 31, 1986), rev'd & remand-ed, 821 F.2d 930 (2d Cir. 1987).
2513 (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(D), attorney'sfees
Kuzma v. United States Postal Serv., No. 81-859(W.D.N.Y. June 29, 1983), aff'd in part, rev'd in part& remanded, 725 F.2d 16 (2d Cir. 1984), cert. de-nied, 469 U.S. 831 (1984).
2514 Duty to search Kyle v. United States, No. 86-3450 (D. Mass. Nov.16, 1989), aff'd, No. 90-1020 (1st Cir. Sept. 10,1990) (unpublished memorandum), 915 F.2d 1556(1st Cir. 1990) (table cite).
2515 (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6), deliberativeprocess, in camera inspection, in-ter- or intra-agency memoranda,reasonably segregable
Kyle v. United States, No. 80-1038 (W.D.N.Y. Oct.24, 1986), partial summary judgment granted (W.D.N.Y. July 15, 1987), amended (W.D.N.Y. Sept. 30,1987).
2516 Mootness Kyles v. FDIC, No. 3:97-622 (D. Conn. Sept. 3,1998).
2517 (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), assurance ofconfidentiality, FOIA as a discov-ery tool, waiver of exemption
L&C Marine Transp. v. United States, 740 F.2d 919(11th Cir. 1984).
2518 (b)(7), (b)(7)(C), discovery inFOIA litigation, in camera affi-davit, in camera inspection, leaks,reasonably segregable, summaryjudgment, waiver of exemption(unauthorized release)
Laborers' Int'l Union v. DOJ, 578 F. Supp. 52 (D.D.C. 1983), aff'd, 772 F.2d 919 (D.C. Cir. 1984).
2519 Dismissal for failure to prosecute Lacaze-Gardner School v. DOJ, 3 GDS ¶83,165 (D.D.C. 1983).
2520 (b)(5), attorney-client privilege,attorney work-product privilege,deliberative process, duty to search
Lacefield v. United States, No. 92-1680, 1993 WL268392 (D. Colo. Mar. 10, 1993).
2521 (b)(5), agency records, attorney'sfees, deliberative process
Lacy v. Dep't of the Navy, 593 F. Supp. 71 (D. Md.1984).
2522 (a)(1)(D), (a)(2)(C), publication Lake Mohave Boat Owners Ass'n v. Nat'l Park Serv.,78 F.3d 1360 (9th Cir. 1996).
2523 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(b)(2),adequacy of request, exhaustion ofadministrative remedies, summaryjudgment
Lamb v. IRS, 871 F. Supp. 301 (E.D. Mich. 1994).
2524 (a)(1), publication Lambert v. Sperry Road Corp., 8 Empl. Prac. Dec.(CCH) ¶9819 (W.D. La. 1974).
- 177 -
2525 (b)(2), (b)(3), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E),assurance of confidentiality, incamera affidavit, summary judg-ment, Vaughn Index, waiver ofexemption (failure to assert inlitigation)
Lame v. DOJ, No. 79-4047 (E.D. Pa. July 28, 1980),rev'd & remanded, 654 F.2d 917 (3d Cir. 1981),summary judgment granted (E.D. Pa. Sept. 20,1984), aff'd, 767 F.2d 66 (3d Cir. 1985).
2526 (b)(2), (b)(3), 18 U.S.C. §2510,(b)(5), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D),(b)(7)(E), (b)(7)(F), agency rec-ords, assurance of confidentiality,deliberative process, duty tosearch, in camera inspection, rea-sonably segregable, summary judg-ment, Vaughn Index
Lam Lek Chong v. DEA, No. 85-3726 (D.D.C. Jan.6, 1986), summary judgment granted (D.D.C. Mar.14, 1988), motion to amend denied (D.D.C. Apr.19, 1989), summary affirmance denied, No. 89-5159(D.C. Cir. Apr. 5, 1990), aff'd, 929 F.2d 729 (D.C.Cir. 1991).
2527 (b)(1), E.O. 12065, (b)(6), (b)(7),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E),assurance of confidentiality, bur-den of proof, in camera inspection,law enforcement purpose, sum-mary judgment
Lamont v. DOJ, 475 F. Supp. 761 (S.D.N.Y. 1979),supplemental decision, No. 76-3092 (S.D.N.Y. Dec.20, 1979), aff'd in part, rev'd in part, No. 81-6078(2d Cir. Sept. 25, 1981) (unpublished order), 672F.2d 900 (2d Cir. 1981) (table cite).
2528 Attorney's fees Lamonte v. FBI, No. 85-H-1746 (N.D. Ala. June 25,1986).
2529 (b)(7) LaMorte v. Mansfield, 438 F.2d 448 (2d Cir. 1971).
2530 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(a),(b)(7)(C)
Lampkin v. IRS, No. 1:96-138, 1997 U.S. Dist.LEXIS 2702 (W.D.N.C. Feb. 24, 1997).
2531 (b)(2), (b)(6), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), assurance of confidenti-ality, attorney's fees, in camera in-spection, law enforcement amend-ments (1986), stay pending appeal
Landano v. DOJ, 751 F. Supp. 502 (D.N.J. 1990),subsequent order, No. 90-1953 (D.N.J. Dec. 13,1990), on motion for clarification, 758 F. Supp.1021 (D.N.J. 1991), emergency stay granted, No.91-5161 (3d Cir. Mar. 12, 1991), rev'd & remandedin part, 956 F.2d 422 (3d Cir. 1992), cert. denied,506 U.S. 868 (1992) (on Exemption 7(C) issue),vacated & remanded, 508 U.S. 165 (1993) (on Ex-emption 7(D) issue), summary judgment granted inpart, 873 F. Supp. 884 (D.D.C. 1994), clarificationdenied (D.N.J. Jan. 5, 1995), attorney's fees awarded(D.N.J. Feb. 10, 1995) (magistrate's recommenda-tion).
2532 Transfer of FOIA case Landes v. Gracey, No. 86-1546 (D.D.C. July 22,1986).
2533 Duty to search Landes v. Shultz, No. 86-0220 (E.D. Pa. Sept. 25,1986), aff'd, 813 F.2d 397 (3d Cir. 1987).
2534 Jurisdiction, no record withinscope of request, proper party de-fendant
Landes v. Smith, No. 83-3615 (D.D.C. Aug. 28,1984), aff'd, No. 84-5635 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 23, 1985),cert. denied, 474 U.S. 821 (1985), reh'g denied, 474U.S. 1014 (1985).
2535 Adequacy of request, duty tosearch, proper party defendant
Landes v. Yost, No. 89-6338 (E.D. Pa. Apr. 12,1990), aff'd, 922 F.2d 832 (3d Cir. 1990).
- 178 -
2536 (b)(4), (b)(5), deliberative process,in camera inspection, promise ofconfidentiality, reasonably segre-gable, summary judgment
Landfair v. Dep't of the Army, 645 F. Supp. 325 (D.D.C. 1986).
2537 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(b)(2),(b)(6), discovery in FOIA litiga-tion, duty to search, Vaughn Index
Landmark Legal Found. v. IRS, 87 F. Supp. 2d 21(D.D.C. 2000), aff'd, 267 F.3d 1132 (D.C. Cir.2001).
2538 (b)(5), deliberative process, dutyto search
Lane v. EPA, 2 GDS ¶81,221 (D.D.C. 1981).
2539 Duty to search Lansberry v. Postmaster General, No. 83-1982(W.D. Pa. Feb. 13, 1984) (magistrate's recommen-dation adopted).
2540 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies
Lanter v. DOJ, No. 93-34 (W.D. Okla. July 30,1993), request to amend denied (W.D. Okla. Aug.30, 1993), aff'd, No. 93-6308 (10th Cir. Mar. 8,1994) (unpublished order), 19 F.3d 33 (10th Cir.1994) (table cite).
2541 Privacy Act access, (b)(1), E.O.12356, (b)(2), (b)(3), 50 U.S.C.§403(d)(3), §403g, Fed.R.Crim.P.6(e), (b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(7),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E),adequacy of agency affidavit, assur-ance of confidentiality, attorney-client privilege, attorney work-product privilege, deliberativeprocess, duty to search, exhaustionof administrative remedies, FOIA/PA interface, in camera inspec-tion, judicial records, law en-forcement amendments (1986),law enforcement purpose, prelim-inary injunction
Laroque v. DOJ, No. 86-2677 (D.D.C. Nov. 18,1986), summary judgment granted in part, 1988 WL28334 (D.D.C. Mar. 16, 1988), on renewed motionfor summary judgment (D.D.C. July 12, 1988).
2542 (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(3), 26 U.S.C.§6103, 50 U.S.C. §403(d)(3),Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e), (b)(5), (b)(6),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E),assurance of confidentiality,attorney work-product privilege,deliberative process, duty tosearch, inter- or intra-agencymemoranda, leaks, reasonablysegregable, referral of request toanother agency, Vaughn Index,waiver of exemption, waiver ofexemption (unauthorized release)
LaRouche v. DOJ, No. 90-2753, 1993 WL 388601(D.D.C. June 24, 1993), summary judgment grantedin part (D.D.C. Nov. 17, 2000), summary judgmentgranted in part (D.D.C. July 5, 2001).
- 179 -
2543 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(a),§6103(b)(2), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e),(b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(7)(C), attorney-client privilege, attorney work-product privilege, deliberativeprocess, duty to search, jurisdic-tion, reasonably segregable, referralof request to another agency,Vaughn Index, waiver of exemp-tion
LaRouche v. Dep't of Treasury, No. 91-1655 (D.D.C. May 21, 1998), subsequent decision (D.D.C.Aug. 24, 1998), reconsideration denied in part, 2000U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5078 (D.D.C. Mar. 31, 2000), sub-sequent opinion, 112 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2000),remanded, No. 00-5199 (D.C. Cir. Sept. 27, 2000),on remand (D.D.C. Nov. 6, 2000).
2544 Reverse FOIA, (b)(1), E.O.11652, (b)(6), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), adequacy of agency af-fidavit, assurance of confidential-ity, attorney's fees, declaratoryrelief, duty to search, exceptionalcircumstances/due diligence, ex-pedited processing, failure to meettime limits, in camera inspection
LaRouche v. Kelley, No. 75-6010 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 15,1977), subsequent decision (S.D.N.Y. May 7, 1979),on in camera inspection, 522 F. Supp. 425 (S.D.N.Y.1981), rev'd & remanded sub nom. LaRouche v.FBI, 677 F.2d 256 (2d Cir. 1982), summary judg-ment granted sub nom. LaRouche v. Webster, 1984WL 1061 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 23, 1984).
2545 Privacy Act access Larry v. Lawler, 605 F.2d 954 (7th Cir. 1978).
2546 Fee waiver, fee waiver (ReformAct)
Larson v. CIA, 664 F. Supp. 15 (D.D.C. 1987), sum-mary affirmance granted, 843 F.2d 1481 (D.C. Cir.1988).
2547 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies, fee waiver, mootness, pro selitigant, Vaughn Index
Larson v. DOJ, No. 85-2991 (D.D.C. Sept. 30,1986), reconsideration denied (D.D.C. Oct. 29,1986).
2548 (b)(3), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e), (b)(5),(b)(7), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D),attorney work-product privilege,law enforcement amendments(1986), law enforcement purpose,summary judgment
Larson v. Executive Office for United States Attor-neys, No. 85-2575, 1988 WL 285732 (D.D.C. Nov.22, 1988).
2549 (b)(3), (b)(5), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), mootness
Larson v. Executive Office for United States Attor-neys, No. 85-6226 (D.C. Cir. Apr. 6, 1988).
2550 (b)(5), inter- or intra-agency mem-oranda
Larson v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, No. 85-2576 (D.D.C. Sept. 17, 1986).
2551 (a)(6)(A), exhaustion of adminis-trative remedies
Larson v. IRS, No. 85-3076 (D.D.C. Dec. 11, 1985).
2552 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(a), (b)(5),(b)(7)(C), deliberative process, lawenforcement amendments (1986)
LaRue v. IRS, No. 3-93-423, 1994 WL 315750(E.D. Tenn. Jan. 27, 1994).
2553 Attorney's fees LaSalle Extension Univ. v. FTC, No. 77-0002 (D.D.C. Jan. 26, 1979), aff'd, 627 F.2d 481 (D.C. Cir.1980).
2554 (b)(5), waiver of exemption (ad-ministrative release), waiver ofexemption (unauthorized release)
Lasker-Goldman Corp. v. GSA, 2 GDS ¶81,125 (D.D.C. 1981).
- 180 -
2555 (b)(7)(C), "Glomar" denial Latshaw v. FBI, No. 93-571 (W.D. Pa. Feb. 21,1994), reconsideration denied (W.D. Pa. Mar. 8,1994), renewed motion for reconsideration denied(W.D. Pa. Apr. 9, 1994), aff'd, 40 F.3d 1240 (3d Cir.1994) (table cite), cert. denied, 514 U.S. 1099(1995).
2556 Agency Lau v. Sullivan County D.A., No. 99-7341, 1999WL 1069966 (2d Cir. Nov. 12, 1998) (unpublishedorder), 201 F.3d 431 (2d Cir. 1999) (table cite),cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1192 (2000).
2557 Attorney's fees, mootness, no rec-ord within scope of request, properparty defendant, summary judg-ment
Laughin v. Comm'r, 117 F. Supp. 2d 997 (S.D. Cal.2000).
2558 Agency records, duty to search,proper party defendant
Laughlin v. Comm'r, 103 F. Supp. 2d 1219 (S.D.Cal. 1999).
2559 (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), summaryjudgment
Lavado v. Dep't of Transp., No. 88-3725 (D.D.C.Aug. 9, 1989), summary affirmance granted, No. 90-5260 (D.C. Cir. May 16, 1991).
2560 Agency records, Vaughn Index LaVerde v. HUD, No. 81-1260 (D. Mass. 1981).
2561 (b)(5), duty to search Law Firm of Tidwell Swaim & Assocs. v. Herrmann,No. 3:97-2097, 1998 WL 740765 (N.D. Tex. Oct.16, 1998).
2562 Jurisdiction, proper party defend-ant
Lawrence v. Comm'r, No. 99-251, 2000 U.S. Dist.LEXIS 5058 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2000).
2563 Fee waiver Lawrence v. FBI, No. 78-2247 (D.D.C. Feb. 28,1979).
2564 Summary judgment Lawrence v. United States Postal Serv., No. 86-0140(D.D.C. Sept. 11, 1986).
2565 (b)(1), E.O. 12356 Lawyers Alliance for Nuclear Arms Control - Phil-adelphia Chapter v. DOE, 766 F. Supp. 318 (E.D.Pa. 1991), summary judgment granted, No. 88-7635,1991 WL 274860 (E.D. Pa. Dec. 18, 1991).
2566 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, (b)(2), (b)(3),8 U.S.C. §1202(f), 50 U.S.C.§403(d)(3), §403g, §431(a),(b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E), adequacy ofagency affidavit, attorney-clientprivilege, attorney work-productprivilege, deliberative process, dutyto search, in camera affidavit, incamera inspection, law enforce-ment amendments (1986), "mo-saic," reasonably segregable, waiverof exemption
Lawyers Comm. for Human Rights v. INS, 721 F.Supp. 552 (S.D.N.Y. 1989), reargument denied, No.87-1115 (S.D.N.Y. May 23, 1990), on in camerainspection (S.D.N.Y. June 7, 1990).
- 181 -
2567 (b)(7)(A), adequacy of agencyaffidavit, duty to search, fee waiver
Leach v. United States Customs Serv., No. 85-1195(D.D.C. Oct. 22, 1985), supplemental memorandum(D.D.C. Oct. 28, 1985).
2568 (b)(5), discovery in FOIA litiga-tion, in camera inspection, reason-ably segregable
Lead Indus. Ass'n v. OSHA, 471 F. Supp. 155 (S.D.N.Y. 1979), aff'd in part, rev'd in part, 610 F.2d 70(2d Cir. 1979).
2569 (b)(7), (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C), lawenforcement amendments (1986),law enforcement purpose, sum-mary judgment
Leavitt v. DOD, No. 88-1371 (S.D. Cal. Feb. 13,1990).
2570 (b)(5), (b)(7)(D), assurance ofconfidentiality
Leavitt v. Dep't of Labor, 2 GDS ¶82,158 (C.D. Cal.1979), aff'd, 2 GDS ¶82,160 (9th Cir. 1981) (consoli-dated) (unpublished memorandum), 654 F.2d 730(9th Cir. 1981) (table cite).
2571 (b)(5), (b)(7)(D), assurance ofconfidentiality
Leavitt v. FBI, 2 GDS ¶82,159 (C.D. Cal. 1979),aff'd, 2 GDS ¶82,160 (9th Cir. 1981) (consolidated)(unpublished memorandum), 654 F.2d 730 (9th Cir.1981) (table cite).
2572 (b)(7)(D), assurance of confiden-tiality, attorney's fees, substantialcompliance
Lebedun v. Civiletti, No. 80-0353 (M.D. Pa. Oct.21, 1981).
2573 (b)(2), (b)(5), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E), (b)(7)(F)
LeClair v. United States Secret Serv., No. 82-2162(D. Mass. Feb. 23, 1983).
2574 (b)(4), (b)(5), adequacy of re-quest, attorney-client privilege,deliberative process, duty tosearch, reasonably segregable
Lederle Labs. v. HHS, No. 88-0249 (D.D.C. July 14,1988).
2575 Agency, proper party defendant Lee v. DOJ, No. 84-1023 (D.D.C. May 23, 1984),summary judgment granted (D.D.C. Oct. 11, 1984).
2576 (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(8), adequacy ofrequest, attorney-client privilege,deliberative process, voluntary sub-missions
Lee v. FDIC, 923 F. Supp. 451 (S.D.N.Y. 1996).
2577 Mootness Lee v. Meese, No. 85-2881 (D.D.C. Mar. 17, 1986).
2578 Duty to search Leebove v. DOJ, No. 96-72463, 1998 U.S. Dist.LEXIS 12364 (E.D. Mich. July 13, 1998).
2579 (a)(2), (a)(2)(A), interaction of(a)(2) & (a)(3), summary judg-ment
Leeds v. Comm'r of Patents & Trademarks, No. 90-1038 (D.D.C. Aug. 31, 1990), aff'd, 955 F.2d 757(D.C. Cir. 1992).
2580 (a)(2), (a)(2)(A), jurisdiction,summary judgment
Leeds v. Quigg, No. 89-1925 (D.D.C. Mar. 26,1990), summary judgment granted, 745 F. Supp. 1(D.D.C. 1990).
2581 (b)(5), attorney-client privilege,deliberative process, interaction of(a)(2) & (a)(3), summary judg-ment
Leeds v. Quigg, No. 89-0635 (D.D.C. Sept. 11,1989), summary affirmance granted in part, No. 89-5418 (D.C. Cir. June 6, 1990).
- 182 -
2582 (b)(3), 35 U.S.C. §122, summaryjudgment, waiver of exemption
Leeds v. Quigg, 720 F. Supp. 193 (D.D.C. 1989).
2583 (b)(3), 35 U.S.C. §122 Lee Pharms. v. Kreps, 577 F.2d 610 (9th Cir. 1978),cert. denied, 439 U.S. 1073 (1979).
2584 (b)(3), 41 U.S.C. §423(a)(1),(b)(5), deliberative process, sum-mary judgment
Legal & Safety Employer Research, Inc. v. Dep't ofthe Army, No. S-00-1748 (E.D. Cal. May 7, 2001).
2585 (b)(3), 42 U.S.C. §2000, (b)(4),(b)(7), adequacy of request, lawenforcement purpose
Legal Aid Soc'y v. Shultz, 349 F. Supp. 771 (N.D.Cal. 1972).
2586 Improper withholding Legal Times v. FDIC, 1 GDS ¶80,234 (D.D.C.1980).
2587 (b)(6), (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C),injunction of agency proceedingpending resolution of FOIA claim
L'Eggs Prods., Inc. v. NLRB, 93 L.R.R.M. 2488(C.D. Cal. 1976).
2588 (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), assurance ofconfidentiality, duty to search, incamera inspection, law enforce-ment amendments (1986)
LeGrand v. FBI, No. 94-0300 (S.D.N.Y. July 10,1995) (magistrate's recommendation), adopted,1995 WL 702333 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 29, 1995).
2589 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(b)(2) Lehrfeld v. Richardson, 954 F. Supp. 9 (D.D.C.1996), aff'd, 132 F.3d 1463 (D.C. Cir. 1998).
2590 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies
Lei v. Brown, No. 94-7776 (E.D. Pa. Jan. 26, 1995).
2591 Duty to search Leib v. VA, 2 GDS ¶82,209 (D.D.C. 1982), sum-mary judgment granted, 546 F. Supp. 758 (D.D.C.1982).
2592 Attorney's fees, jurisdiction Leier v. Dep't of the Treasury, No. 92-0583 (M.D.Fla. Nov. 18, 1993).
2593 Proper party defendant Leitzsey v. Coombe, 998 F. Supp. 282 (W.D.N.Y.1998).
2594 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(e)(7),(b)(5), (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C),attorney-client privilege, attorney'sfees, deliberative process, law en-forcement amendments (1986)
LeMaine v. IRS, No. 89-2914, 1991 U.S. Dist.LEXIS 18651 (D. Mass. Dec. 10, 1991).
2595 Injunction of agency proceedingpending resolution of FOIA claim
Lennon v. Richardson, 378 F. Supp. 39 (S.D.N.Y.1974).
2596 (b)(4), (b)(6), mootness, summaryjudgment
Lepelletier v. FDIC, 977 F. Supp. 456 (D.D.C.1997), rev'd & remanded, 164 F.3d 37 (D.C. Cir.1999), on remand, No. 96-1363 (D.D.C. Mar. 3,2000) (order & transcript), aff'd, 23 Fed. Appx. 4(D.C. Cir. 2001).
2597 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, (b)(3), 50U.S.C. §403(d)(3), §403g, (b)(5),deliberative process, duty to search
Lesar v. CIA, No. 93-2598 (D.D.C. Oct. 12, 1995).
- 183 -
2598 (b)(2), (b)(7), (b)(7)(D), duty tosearch, law enforcement amend-ments (1986), law enforcementpurpose
Lesar v. DOJ, No. 92-2216 (D.D.C. Oct. 18, 1993),summary judgment granted (D.D.C. Mar. 14, 1995).
2599 (b)(1), E.O. 11652, (b)(2), (b)(7),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), belated clas-sification, law enforcement pur-pose, leaks
Lesar v. DOJ, 455 F. Supp. 921 (D.D.C. 1978), aff'd,636 F.2d 472 (D.C. Cir. 1980).
2600 (b)(3), 50 U.S.C. app. §2411(c) Lessner v. Dep't of Commerce, 827 F.2d 1333 (9th
Cir. 1987).
2601 (b)(1), (b)(3), 8 U.S.C. §1202(f),50 U.S.C. §403(d)(3), (b)(5),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), attorney'sfees, Congressional records, delib-erative process, discovery in FOIAlitigation
Letelier v. DOJ, 1 GDS ¶80,252 (D.D.C. 1980),subsequent decision, 3 GDS ¶82,257 (D.D.C. 1982).
2602 Privacy Act access, duty to search Letscher v. IRS, No. 95-0077, 1995 WL 555476 (D.D.C. July 6, 1995).
2603 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(a), (b)(5),(b)(6), (b)(7), (b)(7)(A),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E),assurance of confidentiality, delib-erative process, law enforcementpurpose, summary judgment
Leveto v. IRS, No. 98-285 E, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS5791 (W.D. Pa. Apr. 10, 2001).
2604 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, adequacy ofagency affidavit, summary judg-ment
Levine v. DOJ, No. 83-1685 (D.D.C. Mar. 30,1984).
2605 Summary judgment Levine v. DOJ, No. 81-1680 (S.D. Fla. Sept. 30,1982).
2606 (b)(4), (b)(6) Levine v. United States, 34 Ad. L. 2d (P & F) 633(S.D. Fla. 1974).
2607 (b)(3), 50 U.S.C. §403(d)(3),"Glomar" denial, summary judg-ment
Levy v. CIA, No. 95-1276 (D.D.C. Nov. 16, 1995),summary affirmance granted, No. 96-5004 (D.C.Cir. Jan. 15, 1997).
2608 (b)(7), (b)(7)(A), law enforcementpurpose
Levy v. IRS, 531 F. Supp. 485 (S.D. Fla. 1982).
2609 (b)(1), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), dutyto search
Levy v. Knight, No. 78-0307 (D.D.C. June 21,1978).
2610 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies
In re Lewis, No. 95-1872, 1996 WL 393398 (E.D.La. Jan. 31, 1996).
2611 (b)(5), (b)(6), inter- or intra-agen-cy memoranda
Lewis v. Fed. Corr. Inst., No. 80-91 (E.D. Ky. Dec.30, 1980).
2612 (b)(5), attorney's fees, deliberativeprocess
Lewis v. Glickman, No. 96-1034, 1996 WL 400723(E.D. La. July 16, 1996).
- 184 -
2613 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(e)(7),(b)(7)(A), FOIA as a discoverytool, in camera inspection, VaughnIndex
Lewis v. IRS, No. 84-038 (D. Alaska Dec. 13, 1985),aff'd, 823 F.2d 375 (9th Cir. 1987).
2614 Injunction of agency proceedingpending resolution of FOIA claim
Lewis v. Reagan, 660 F.2d 124 (5th Cir. 1981).
2615 (b)(5), stay pending appeal Lewis v. United States Parole Comm'n, No. 85-4059(D.D.C. Mar. 13, 1986), dismissed (D.D.C. Sept. 23,1986).
2616 Privacy Act access, (b)(7),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), assurance ofconfidentiality, law enforcementpurpose, summary judgment
Lewis v. United States Postal Serv., No. S96-3467(D. Md. Apr. 30, 1997).
2617 (a)(1)(D), publication Lewis v. Weinberger, 415 F. Supp. 652 (D.N.M.1976).
2618 Adequacy of request, agency rec-ords, attorney's fees, duty tosearch, mootness, Vaughn Index
Lewisburg Prison Project, Inc. v. Fed. Bureau ofPrisons, No. 86-1339 (M.D. Pa. Dec. 16, 1986), dis-missed (M.D. Pa. Dec. 18, 1986), aff'd, 826 F.2d1056 (3d Cir. 1987).
2619 Agency, agency records Leytman v. N.Y. Stock Exchange, No. 95-902, 1995WL 761843 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 6, 1995).
2620 Adequacy of agency affidavit, feewaiver (Reform Act)
Liberto v. DOJ, No. 94-0272 (D.D.C. June 13,1994), motion to amend denied (D.D.C. June 23,1994).
2621 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103, Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(E)
Librach v. FBI, 587 F.2d 372 (8th Cir. 1978), cert.denied, 440 U.S. 910 (1979).
2622 (b)(1), (b)(3), 50 U.S.C.§403(d)(3), §403g, (b)(5), (b)(6),summary judgment
Liechty v. CIA, No. 79-2065 (D.D.C. Apr. 16,1981), on motion for attorney's fees, 3 GDS ¶82,482(D.D.C. 1982).
2623 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, (b)(2), (b)(7),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), assurance ofconfidentiality, belated classifica-tion, law enforcement purpose,waiver of exemption
Lieverman v. DOJ, 597 F. Supp. 84 (E.D. Pa. 1984).
2624 Statute of limitations Lighter v. IRS, No. 00-00289, 2001 U.S. Dist.LEXIS 3483 (D. Haw. Feb. 27, 2001).
2625 (b)(6), (b)(7), (b)(7)(C), in cam-era inspection, law enforcementpurpose
Ligorner v. Reno, 2 F. Supp. 2d 400 (S.D.N.Y.1998).
2626 (a)(6)(A), exhaustion of adminis-trative remedies
Lilienthal v. Parks, 574 F. Supp. 14 (E.D. Ark.1983).
2627 (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), assurance ofconfidentiality, in camera inspec-tion, jurisdiction
Lincoln Nat'l Bank v. DOJ, No. 76-C-4531 (N.D.Ill. May 5, 1978), aff'd, No. 78-1920 (7th Cir. June18, 1979) (unpublished order), 601 F.2d 600 (7th
Cir. 1979) (table cite).
- 185 -
2628 Adequacy of request, FOIA as adiscovery tool
Lincoln Nat'l Bank v. Lampe, 421 F. Supp. 346(N.D. Ill. 1976).
2629 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), attorney's fees, sum-mary judgment
Linder v. FBI, No. 89-345 (D. Or. Oct. 31, 1989),attorney's fees awarded (D. Or. Jan. 18, 1990).
2630 No record within scope of request,summary judgment
Lindgren v. CIA, No. 78-1246 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 3,1978).
2631 Mootness Lindholm v. United States, 808 F. Supp. 7 (D.D.C.1992).
2632 (b)(2), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D),(b)(7)(F), exceptional circum-stances/due diligence
Lindow v. FBI, No. 94-156 (E.D. Ky. May 8, 1995)(magistrate's recommendation), adopted (E.D. Ky.Aug. 14, 1995).
2633 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies
Lindsay v. Burns, No. 94-5138, 1995 WL 364073(D.C. Cir. May 11, 1995).
2634 Judicial records Lindsey v. Bureau of Prisons, 736 F.2d 1462 (11th
Cir. 1984), cert. granted, vacated & remanded, 469U.S. 1082 (1984).
2635 No record within scope of request,summary judgment
Lindsey v. NSC, No. 84-3897 (D.D.C. Mar. 11,1985), summary judgment granted (D.D.C. July 12,1985), motion to vacate denied (D.D.C. Oct. 16,1985).
2636 (b)(1), (b)(3), duty to search, ex-haustion of administrative reme-dies
Lindsey v. Nat'l Sec. Agency/Cent. Sec. Serv., No.87-1564 (D. Md. May 22, 1990), aff'd in part, va-cated in part & remanded, No. 90-2408 (4th Cir.Oct. 9, 1990) (unpublished memorandum), 915F.2d 1565 (4th Cir. 1990) (table cite), on remand(D. Md. July 17, 1991), aff'd, No. 92-2309 (4th Cir.Sept. 16, 1993) (unpublished memorandum), 7 F.3d224 (4th Cir. 1993) (table cite).
2637 (b)(1), E.O. 11652, (b)(2), (b)(7),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(E), law enforce-ment purpose
Linebarger v. FBI, No. C76-1826 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 1,1977).
2638 Case or controversy Lineberry v. IRS, No. C-C-016 (W.D.N.C. July 22,1986).
2639 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies
Lingenfelter v. FBI, No. 83-3129 (D.D.C. Mar. 21,1984).
2640 (b)(3), Fed.R.Crim.P. 32, judicialrecords, waiver of exemption
Lininger v. DOJ, No. 84-1129 (D.D.C. Oct. 30,1984).
2641 (b)(5), attorney work-productprivilege
Linker v. Hills, 453 F. Supp. 556 (S.D.N.Y. 1978).
- 186 -
2642 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, (b)(2), (b)(3),31 U.S.C. §5319, Fed.R.Crim.P.6(e), (b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(7)(A),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E),(b)(7)(F), adequacy of request, as-surance of confidentiality, attor-ney-client privilege, attorney work-product privilege, deliberativeprocess, duty to search, exhaustionof administrative remedies, feewaiver (Reform Act), in camerainspection, law enforcementamendments (1986), reasonablysegregable, referral of request toanother agency, Vaughn Index,waiver of exemption
Linn v. DOJ, No. 92-1406, 1995 WL 417810 (D.D.C. June 6, 1995), further opinion, 1995 WL631847 (D.D.C. Aug. 22, 1995), summary judgmentgranted in part, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9321 (D.D.C. May 29, 1997).
2643 (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), duty tosearch, pro se litigant, VaughnIndex
Linneman v. FBI, No. 89-0505 (D.D.C. Nov. 8,1989), summary judgment granted in part (D.D.C.July 13, 1992).
2644 (a)(1)(D), publication Linoz v. Heckler, 598 F. Supp. 486 (D. Haw. 1984).
2645 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(e)(7),(b)(7)(A), displacement of FOIA,FOIA as a discovery tool
Linsteadt v. IRS, 3 GDS ¶83,235 (N.D. Tex. 1983),aff'd, 729 F.2d 998 (5th Cir. 1984).
2646 (b)(2), (b)(7)(C) Lipman v. United States, No. 3:97-667 (M.D. Pa.June 3, 1998).
2647 Exceptional circumstances/due dil-igence, expedited processing,Vaughn Index
Lisee v. CIA, 741 F. Supp. 988 (D.D.C. 1990).
2648 (b)(7)(C), attorney's fees, properparty defendant, summary judg-ment, waiver of exemption
Lissner v. United States Customs Serv., No. 98-7438(C.D. Cal. June 15, 1999), attorney's fees denied(C.D. Cal. Aug. 19, 1999), rev'd & remanded, 241F.3d 1220 (9th Cir. 2001).
2649 Duty to search Liverman v. IRS, No. 95-1921, 1996 U.S. Dist.LEXIS 7642 (D.D.C. May 16, 1996).
2650 Privacy Act access, (b)(1), E.O.12958, (b)(7)(C), duty to search
Livshits v. United States, No. 00-1561 (D.D.C.Sept. 20, 2001), summary judgment granted (D.D.C.Oct. 25, 2001).
2651 Duty to search Ljubas v. FBI, No. 83-2178 (D.D.C. Oct. 4, 1983).
2652 Attorney's fees, mootness Lloyd v. DOJ, No. C83-1790 (N.D. Ga. July 31,1984).
2653 (b)(5), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D),FOIA as a discovery tool
Lloyd & Henniger v. Marshall, 526 F. Supp. 485(M.D. Fla. 1981).
- 187 -
2654 Privacy Act access, (a)(2)(A),(b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103, (b)(5),(b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D),assurance of confidentiality, attor-ney's fees, attorney work-productprivilege, discovery in FOIA liti-gation, in camera inspection
Lobosco v. IRS, No. 77-1464 (E.D.N.Y. Nov. 29,1977), summary judgment granted, 42 A.F.T.R. 2d78-5630 (E.D.N.Y. 1978), on motion for attorney'sfees, 1981 WL 1780 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 14, 1981).
2655 (b)(6) Local 1928, Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees v. Dep'tof the Navy, No. 81-1478 (D.D.C. Nov. 25, 1981).
2656 Attorney's fees Local 608, United Bhd. of Carpenters & Joiners v.Silverman, No. 89-6604 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 19, 1990).
2657 (b)(5), (b)(6), deliberative process,discovery in FOIA litigation,FOIA as a discovery tool, in cam-era inspection, reasonably segre-gable, summary judgment
Local 3, Int'l Bhd. of Elec. Workers v. NLRB, 126L.R.R.M. 2743 (S.D.N.Y. 1987), aff'd, 845 F.2d1177 (2d Cir. 1988).
2658 (b)(5), (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D)
Local 30, AFL-CIO v. NLRB, 408 F. Supp. 520(E.D. Pa. 1976).
2659 (b)(5), (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C) Local 32, AFL-CIO v. Irving, 91 L.R.R.M. 2513(W.D. Wash. 1976).
2660 (b)(3), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e), (b)(7),(b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C), jurisdiction,law enforcement purpose
Local 32B-32J, Serv. Employees Int'l Union v. GSA,No. 97-8509, 1998 WL 726000 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 15,1998).
2661 (b)(7)(A) Local Unions v. NLRB, 446 F. Supp. 1037 (E.D.Wis. 1978).
2662 (b)(3), (b)(6), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E), in camerainspection, summary judgment
Locklear v. DOJ (FBI), No. 83-1707 (D.D.C. Feb.15, 1984).
2663 (b)(7)(D), reasonably segregable Lodi v. IRS, No. S-96-2095, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS6414 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 14, 1998).
2664 Mootness Lofton v. Bureau of Prisons, No. 90-1337 (D. Ariz.July 10, 1994), aff'd, No. 94-16382, 1995 U.S. App.LEXIS 14444 (9th Cir. June 8, 1995) (unpublishedmemorandum), 57 F.3d 1077 (9th Cir. 1995) (tablecite).
2665 Attorney's fees Loglia v. IRS, No. 96-2654, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS5506 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 25, 1997).
2666 Summary judgment Lombardo v. DOJ, No. 87-2652 (D.D.C. June 22,1988).
2667 Agency Lombardo v. Handler, 397 F. Supp. 792 (D.D.C.1975), aff'd, 546 F.2d 1043 (D.C. Cir. 1976), cert.denied, 431 U.S. 932 (1977).
2668 Privacy Act access, (b)(7)(D),assurance of confidentiality, FOIA/PA interface, Vaughn Index
Londrigan v. FBI, No. 78-1360 (D.D.C. Jan. 30,1979), rev'd & remanded, 670 F.2d 1164 (D.C. Cir.1981), on remand (D.D.C. Nov. 18, 1982), rev'd &remanded, 722 F.2d 840 (D.C. Cir. 1983).
- 188 -
2669 (b)(3), (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(7)(A),attorney work-product privilege,deliberative process, waiver ofexemption (unauthorized release)
Lone Star Indus. v. FTC, No. 82-3150 (D.D.C. June8, 1983), summary judgment granted (D.D.C. Mar.26, 1984).
2670 (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), assurance ofconfidentiality, proper party de-fendant
Loney v. DOJ, No. 83-340 (E.D. Va. June 15, 1983).
2671 Fee waiver (Reform Act), moot-ness
Long v. BATF, 964 F. Supp. 494 (D.D.C. 1997).
2672 (a)(4)(C), (a)(4)(D), (b)(3), 26U.S.C. §6103(b)(2), attorney'sfees, de novo review, displacementof FOIA, duty to create a record,jurisdiction, reasonably segregable,summary judgment
Long v. Bureau of Econ. Analysis, 2 GDS ¶81,063(W.D. Wash. 1981), aff'd & remanded to determineattorney's fees, 646 F.2d 1310 (9th Cir. 1981), vaca-ted & remanded, 454 U.S. 934 (1981), remanded todetermine attorney's fees, 671 F.2d 1229 (9th Cir.1982), fee waiver granted, 566 F. Supp. 799 (W.D.Wash. 1983), rev'd & remanded, 742 F.2d 1173 (9th
Cir. 1984), on remand, No. C78-176 (W.D. Wash.Mar. 14, 1986), aff'd in part, rev'd in part & remand-ed, 825 F.2d 225 (9th Cir. 1987), cert. granted, vaca-ted & remanded, 487 U.S. 1201 (1988), rev'd, 891F.2d 222 (9th Cir. 1989), rev'd on attorney's fees is-sue, 932 F.2d 1309 (9th Cir. 1991).
2673 (b)(3), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e), (b)(5),(b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D),discovery in FOIA litigation,Vaughn Index
Long v. DOJ, 10 F. Supp. 2d 205 (N.D.N.Y. 1998).
2674 Fee waiver, venue Long v. DOJ, No. 79-169 (N.D. Ala. Aug. 14,1979).
2675 (b)(2), (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103,(b)(5), deliberative process, dis-ciplinary proceedings, discovery/FOIA interface, duty to search,jurisdiction, waiver of exemption(failure to assert in litigation)
Long v. IRS, 1 GDS ¶79,176 (W.D. Wash. 1979),remanded in part, 1 GDS ¶79,177 (W.D. Wash.1979), on remand, 3 GDS ¶82,434 (W.D. Wash.1981), injunctive relief denied, 3 GDS ¶82,435(W.D. Wash. 1981), rev'd, 3 GDS ¶83,013 (9th Cir.1982), permanent injunction ordered, No. C77-650(W.D. Wash. Oct. 11, 1983).
2676 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(b)(2), at-torney's fees, de novo review, dis-covery in FOIA litigation, dis-placement of FOIA, duty to createa record, equitable discretion, fees,"mosaic," reasonably segregable,waiver of exemption (failure to as-sert in litigation)
Long v. IRS, No. C75-228 (W.D. Wash. June 1,1976), rev'd, 596 F.2d 362 (9th Cir. 1979), reh'g enbanc denied, No. 76-3734 (9th Cir. Nov. 9, 1979),cert. denied, 446 U.S. 917 (1980), on remand, 3GDS ¶82,436 (W.D. Wash. 1982), rev'd & remand-ed, 693 F.2d 907 (9th Cir. 1982), fee waiver granted,566 F. Supp. 799 (W.D. Wash. 1983), rev'd & re-manded, 742 F.2d 1173 (9th Cir. 1984), on remand(W.D. Wash. Mar. 14, 1986), aff'd in part, rev'd inpart & remanded, 825 F.2d 225 (9th Cir. 1987), cert.granted, vacated & remanded, 487 U.S. 1201(1988), rev'd, 891 F.2d 222 (9th Cir. 1989), rev'd onattorney's fees issue, 932 F.2d 1309 (9th Cir. 1991).
2677 (b)(2), (b)(5), (b)(7), adequacy ofrequest
Long v. IRS, 339 F. Supp. 1266 (W.D. Wash. 1971),subsequent decision, 349 F. Supp. 871 (W.D. Wash.1972).
- 189 -
2678 (a)(1), publication Lonsdale v. United States, 919 F.2d 1440 (10th Cir.1990).
2679 (b)(1), E.O. 12958, duty to search Loomis v. DOE, No. 96-0149 (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 9,1999), appeal dismissed, No. 99-6084, 1999 WL1012451 (2d Cir. Oct. 14, 1999) (unpublishedorder), 199 F.3d 1322 (2d Cir. 1999) (table cite),aff'd, 21 Fed. Appx. 80 (2d Cir. 2001).
2680 Attorney's fees, duty to search, ex-haustion of administrative reme-dies, mootness
Looney v. Walters-Tucker, 20 F. Supp. 2d 70 (D.D.C. 1998), summary judgment granted, 98 F. Supp.2d 1 (D.D.C. 2000), aff'd sub nom. Looney v. FDIC,2 Fed. Appx. 8 (D.C. Cir. 2001).
2681 (b)(1), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D),attorney's fees, exhaustion of ad-ministrative remedies, in camerainspection
Lopez Pacheco v. FBI, 470 F. Supp. 1091 (D.P.R.1979), attorney's fees denied, No. 76-83 (D.P.R. Jan.10, 1980).
2682 (b)(2), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(E),(b)(7)(F), adequacy of agency affi-davit
Lopiccolo v. Aruslan, 2 GDS ¶81,032 (D.D.C.1980).
2683 (a)(2)(C), (b)(2), (b)(5), attor-ney's fees
Lord & Taylor v. Dep't of Labor, No. 75-2839 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 27, 1976), attorney's fees denied (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 13, 1977).
2684 Declaratory relief, exceptional cir-cumstances/due diligence
Los Alamos Study Group v. DOE, No. 99-201 (D.N.M. Oct. 26, 1999).
2685 Agency records Los Alamos Study Group v. DOE, No. 97-1412 (D.N.M. July 22, 1998).
2686 (b)(5), (b)(7)(C), attorney work-product privilege, summary judg-ment, waiver of exemption
Los Angeles County Bldg. & Constr. Trades Coun-cil, AFL-CIO v. NLRB, No. 87-1647 (C.D. Cal.Oct. 15, 1987).
2687 (a)(1)(D), publication Louis v. Nelson, 544 F. Supp. 973 (S.D. Fla. 1982).
2688 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies
Love v. IRS, 46 A.F.T.R. 2d 80-5034, 2 GDS ¶82,098 (N.D. Ga. 1980).
2689 Attorney's fees, disciplinary pro-ceedings, mootness, pro se litigant
Lovell v. Alderete, No. 78-438 (N.D. Ga. Apr. 30,1979), aff'd, 630 F.2d 428 (5th Cir. 1980).
2690 Attorney's fees, duty to search,mootness
Lovell v. DOJ, No. 83-0273 (D.D.C. Jan. 17, 1984),attorney's fees denied, 589 F. Supp. 150 (D.D.C.1984).
2691 Proper party defendant, properservice of process
Lovett v. DeAngelos, No. C93-1293 (N.D. Cal. Feb.21, 1994), aff'd, No. 94-15628 (9th Cir. Nov. 8,1994) (unpublished memorandum), 39 F.3d 1187(9th Cir. 1994) (table cite).
2692 No improper withholding Lowe v. FBI, No. 96-512-B (E.D. Okla. July 31,1998).
2693 (a)(2), (b)(6), duty to search, ex-haustion of administrative reme-dies
Lowry v. Soc. Sec. Admin., No. 00-1616 (D. Or.Aug. 29, 2001), reconsideration denied (D. Or.Nov. 7, 2001), judgment rendered (D. Or. Dec. 19,2001).
- 190 -
2694 (b)(5), agency, attorney-clientprivilege, attorney work-productprivilege, deliberative process,proper party defendant, waiver ofexemption (administrative release)
LSB Indus. v. Comm'r, 556 F. Supp. 40 (W.D. Okla.1982).
2695 (b)(5), (b)(7)(A) In re LTV Sec. Litig., 89 F.R.D. 595 (N.D. Tex.1981).
2696 Jurisdiction Lucabaugh v. IRS, No. 97-23893, 2000 Bankr.LEXIS 959 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. July 28, 2000), aff'd,No. 00-4479, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19993 (E.D.Pa. Dec. 19, 2000).
2697 Summary judgment Lucas v. DOJ, No. 88-1701 (D.D.C. Apr. 12, 1989).
2698 (b)(5), attorney-client privilege,inter- or intra-agency memoranda,summary judgment
Ludsin v. SBA, No. 96-2865 (D.D.C. Apr. 24,1997).
2699 Proper party defendant, VaughnIndex
Lufkin v. Dir., Executive Office for United StatesAttorneys, No. 85-1959 (D.D.C. Feb. 21, 1986),subsequent decision (D.D.C. Mar. 10, 1987).
2700 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies
Lumarse v. HHS, 191 F.3d 460 (9th Cir. 1999).
2701 (b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(7), (b)(7)(C),attorney-client privilege, delibera-tive process, law enforcementamendments (1986), law enforce-ment purpose
Lurie v. Dep't of the Army, 970 F. Supp. 19 (D.D.C.1997), appeal dismissed, No. 97-5248 (D.C. Cir.Oct. 22, 1997).
2702 Privacy Act access, (b)(3), 26U.S.C. §6103(b), (b)(5), (b)(7),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(F), deliberativeprocess, law enforcement amend-ments (1986), law enforcementpurpose
Luther v. IRS, No. 5-86-130 (D. Minn. June 8,1987) (magistrate's recommendation), adopted (D.Minn. Aug. 11, 1987).
2703 (b)(5), (b)(6), in camera inspec-tion
Lutz v. HHS, No. 94-1107 (E.D. La. Dec. 8, 1994).
2704 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103, §7213,(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), assurance ofconfidentiality, attorney's fees
Luzaich v. United States, 435 F. Supp. 31 (D. Minn.1977), aff'd, 564 F.2d 101 (8th Cir. 1977).
2705 (a)(2), fees, fee waiver Lybarger v. Cardwell, 438 F. Supp. 1075 (D. Mass.1977), aff'd, 577 F.2d 764 (1st Cir. 1978).
2706 Reverse FOIA, (b)(4), summaryjudgment, voluntary submissions
Lykes Bros. S.S. Co. v. Pena, No. 92-2780 (D.D.C.Aug. 31, 1993).
2707 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies
Lykins v. DOJ, 3 GDS ¶83,092 (D.D.C. 1983).
2708 Fees, fee waiver Lykins v. Rose, 3 GDS ¶82,486 (D.D.C. 1982).
2709 Fees, fee waiver Lykins v. Rose, 3 GDS ¶82,487 (D.D.C. 1982).
- 191 -
2710 Privacy Act access, (b)(5),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), adequacy ofagency affidavit, agency records,case or controversy, FOIA/PA in-terface, improper withholding, incamera affidavit, in camera in-spection, jurisdiction, waiver ofexemption (failure to assert inlitigation)
Lykins v. Rose, 3 GDS ¶82,522 (D.D.C. 1982), aff'din part, rev'd & remanded in part sub nom. Lykins v.DOJ, 725 F.2d 1455 (D.C. Cir. 1984), on remandsub nom. Lykins v. Rose, 608 F. Supp. 693 (D.D.C.1984).
2711 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103, (b)(5),(b)(7)(A), discovery in FOIAlitigation, discretionary release,duty to search, Vaughn Index
Lyle v. IRS, No. C77-942 (N.D. Ga. June 20, 1978),subsequent decision (N.D. Ga. Sept. 27, 1978).
2712 Fee waiver, improper withholding Lyles v. DOJ, No. 78-1826 (D.D.C. June 6, 1979).
2713 Adequacy of request, proper partydefendant
Lynas v. DOJ, No. 84-2387 (D.D.C. Nov. 2, 1984),reconsideration denied (D.D.C. Jan. 25, 1985),summary judgment granted (D.D.C. Mar. 4, 1985).
2714 (b)(7), (b)(7)(A), adequacy ofagency affidavit, law enforcementpurpose
Lynch v. Dep't of the Treasury, No. 98-56368, 2000WL 123236 (9th Cir. Jan. 28, 2000) (unpublishedmemorandum), 210 F.3d 384 (9th Cir. 2000) (tablecite), cert. denied, 530 U.S. 1215 (2000).
2715 No record within scope of request Lynch v. IRS, No. 77-1370 (D.D.C. May 10, 1978).
2716 Failure to meet time limits, FOIAas a discovery tool, FOIA/PA in-terface
Lynch v. United States Parole Comm'n, 768 F.2d491 (2d Cir. 1985).
2717 Duty to search Lynn v. Dep't of Labor, No. 97-0902 (M.D. Pa. Apr.14, 1998).
2718 Dismissal for failure to prosecute Lynott v. DOJ, No. 86-2332 (D.D.C. Jan. 29, 1987).
2719 Jurisdiction, mootness Lynott v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, No. 89-2232 (D.D.C. Apr. 30, 1990).
2720 (b)(2), (b)(6), (b)(7)(A),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), summaryjudgment
Lynott v. United States Parole Comm'n, No. 85-0526 (D.D.C. Dec. 24, 1985).
2721 Dismissal for failure to prosecute Lynott v. United States Parole Comm'n, No. 85-3678 (D.D.C. Dec. 24, 1985).
2722 (b)(5), (b)(7)(A), attorney's fees,deliberative process, duty tosearch, in camera inspection, sum-mary judgment
Lyons v. OSHA, No. 88-1562 (D. Mass. Dec. 2,1991).
2723 (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6), inter- or in-tra-agency memoranda, promise ofconfidentiality
M/A-COM Info. Sys. v. HHS, 656 F. Supp. 691(D.D.C. 1986).
2724 (b)(7), (b)(7)(A), FOIA as a dis-covery tool, in camera inspection,law enforcement purpose, sum-mary judgment, Vaughn Index
Maccaferri Gabions, Inc. v. DOJ, No. 95-2576 (D.Md. Mar. 26, 1996), appeal voluntarily dismissed,No. 96-1513 (4th Cir. Sept. 19, 1996).
- 192 -
2725 (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(F) MacCloskey v. DOJ, 3 GDS ¶83,069 (D.D.C. 1983).
2726 (b)(2), (b)(3), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E),(b)(7)(F)
MacCloskey v. Dep't of the Treasury, 3 GDS ¶83,186 (D.D.C. 1983).
2727 (b)(5), deliberative process, dutyto search, jurisdiction, in camerainspection, summary judgment
Mace v. EEOC, 37 F. Supp. 2d 1144 (E.D. Mo.1999), aff'd, 197 F.3d 329 (8th Cir. 1999).
2728 Discovery in FOIA litigation, ex-ceptional circumstances/due dili-gence, Vaughn Index
Mackenzie v. CIA, No. 82-1676 (D.D.C. Mar. 26,1984).
2729 (a)(1), (a)(1)(D), (a)(1)(E), pub-lication
Mada-Luna v. Fitzpatrick, 813 F.2d 1006 (9th Cir.1987).
2730 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies, statute of limitations
Madden v. Runyon, 899 F. Supp. 217 (E.D. Pa.1995).
2731 (b)(6) Madeira Nursing Ctr. v. NLRB, 96 L.R.R.M. 2411(S.D. Ohio 1977), aff'd, 615 F.2d 728 (6th Cir.1980).
2732 (b)(5), summary judgment, waiverof exemption
Madera Cmty. Hosp. v. United States, No. 86-542(E.D. Cal. June 28, 1988).
2733 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(a), (b)(7),agency, exhaustion of administra-tive remedies, Vaughn Index
Maginn v. United States, No. 92-313 (W.D. Pa.Apr. 17, 1992), summary judgment granted (W.D.Pa. May 29, 1992).
2734 Privacy Act access Maher v. United States Parole Comm'n, 2 GDS ¶81,348 (W.D. Tex. 1980).
2735 Dismissal for failure to prosecute Mahler v. Bureau of Prisons, No. 81-74299 (E.D.Mich. Dec. 9, 1982).
2736 Adequacy of request, exhaustionof administrative remedies, failureto meet time limits, fee waiver
Mahler v. Bureau of Prisons, 2 GDS ¶82,031 (D.D.C. 1980).
2737 (b)(5), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D),(b)(7)(F), fee waiver, improperwithholding
Mahler v. DOJ, 2 GDS ¶82,032 (D.D.C. 1981).
2738 Attorney's fees Mahler v. IRS, No. 79-3238 (D.D.C. Mar. 28,1980).
2739 (b)(5), (b)(6), attorney-clientprivilege, attorney work-productprivilege, deliberative process, incamera inspection, reasonablysegregable, stay pending appeal,summary judgment
Maine v. Dep't of the Interior, 124 F. Supp. 2d 728(D. Me. 2001), on in camera inspection, No. 00-122, 2001 WL 77892 (D. Me. Jan. 29, 2001), staygranted, 2001 WL 98373 (D. Me. Feb. 5, 2001),aff'd in part, vacated in part, 285 F.3d 126 (1st Cir.2002).
2740 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies
Maintanis v. Dep't of the Navy, No. 79-C-1143(N.D. Ill. Jan. 30, 1980).
2741 Dismissal for failure to prosecute Majestic v. FBI, No. 87-0146 (D.D.C. Oct. 1, 1987).
- 193 -
2742 Agency, exhaustion of adminis-trative remedies
Maki v. DOJ, No. 1:89-1041 (W.D. Mich. July 9,1990).
2743 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies
Maki v. Sessions, No. 1:90-587, 1991 U.S. Dist.LEXIS 7103 (W.D. Mich. May 29, 1991).
2744 Adequacy of request, exhaustionof administrative remedies
Malak v. Tenet, No. 01 C 3996, 2001 WL 664451(N.D. Ill. June 12, 2001).
2745 Privacy Act access, (b)(6) Maldonado Guzman v. Massanari, No. 00-2410 (D.P.R. Aug. 14, 2001), subsequent related opinion subnom. Maldonado Guzman v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec.,182 F. Supp. 2d 216 (D.P.R. 2002).
2746 No record within scope of request Malinowski v. FBI, No. 86-2239 (S.D.N.Y. June 17,1987).
2747 (b)(1), E.O. 12065, (b)(2), (b)(3),50 U.S.C. §403g, Fed.R.Crim.P.6(e), (b)(6), (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E), (b)(7)(F),adequacy of agency affidavit, bur-den of proof, in camera inspection
Malizia v. DOJ, 519 F. Supp. 338 (S.D.N.Y. 1981).
2748 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, in camera in-spection, summary judgment
Malka v. FBI, No. 84-0598 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 31,1986).
2749 (a)(1), publication Malkan FM Assocs. v. FCC, 935 F.2d 1313 (D.C.Cir. 1991).
2750 (b)(5), (b)(7)(C) Mallin v. NLRB, No. 78-C-1753 (N.D. Ill. May 31,1979).
2751 Reverse FOIA, (b)(4), summaryjudgment, voluntary submissions
Mallinckrodt Inc. v. West, 140 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2000).
2752 (b)(2), (b)(6), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E)
Malloy v. DOJ, 457 F. Supp. 543 (D.D.C. 1978).
2753 (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D) Maloley Bros. v. USDA, 1 GDS ¶80,264 (N.D. Ind.1980).
2754 Attorney's fees, duty to search Malone v. Freeh, No. 97-3043 (D.D.C. Mar. 30,1999), costs granted (D.D.C. July 13, 1999).
2755 (b)(6), no record within scope ofrequest
Malone v. Horner, No. 86-5237 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 5,1987).
2756 Agency, proper party defendant Mamarella v. County of Westchester, 898 F. Supp.236 (S.D.N.Y. 1995).
2757 (b)(2), (b)(3), 18 U.S.C. §2518,Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e), (b)(5),(b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D),(b)(7)(E), (b)(7)(F), adequacy ofagency affidavit, attorney work-product privilege, deliberativeprocess, duty to search
Manchester v. DEA, 823 F. Supp. 1259 (E.D. Pa.1993).
2758 Dismissal for failure to prosecute,pro se litigant
Mancini v. DOJ, No. 87-2047 (D.D.C. Feb. 10,1988), dismissed (D.D.C. May 20, 1988).
- 194 -
2759 Interaction of (a)(2) & (a)(3) Mandel, Grunfeld and Herrick v. United StatesCustoms Serv., 709 F.2d 41 (11th Cir. 1983).
2760 Exceptional circumstances/due dil-igence, expedited processing
Mangold v. CIA, No. 88-1826 (D.D.C. May 3,1989).
2761 (b)(5) Manion v. HHS, No. C85-8527 (N.D. Cal. May 12,1986).
2762 (b)(6), (b)(7)(E) Manley v. Young, No. 82-1697 (S.D. Cal. Dec. 21,1983).
2763 (b)(2), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), dutyto search, in camera inspection,law enforcement amendments(1986), Vaughn Index
Manna v. DOJ, 832 F. Supp. 866 (D.N.J. 1993).
2764 (b)(3), 18 U.S.C. §§2510-2520,§3123(d), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e),(b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(7)(A),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(F),assurance of confidentiality, attor-ney-client privilege, attorney work-product privilege, deliberativeprocess, duty to search, law en-forcement amendments (1986),status of plaintiff, Vaughn Index
Manna v. DOJ, 815 F. Supp. 798 (D.N.J. 1993),reconsideration denied, No. 92-1840 (D.N.J. Apr.21, 1993), summary judgment granted (D.N.J. Aug.25, 1993), aff'd, 51 F.3d 1158 (3d Cir. 1995), cert.denied, 516 U.S. 975 (1995).
2765 (a)(2)(C), (b)(5), attorney work-product privilege, deliberativeprocess, waiver of exemption
Manning v. IRS, No. C78-315 (M.D.N.C. Feb. 13,1980) (magistrate's recommendation), adopted(M.D.N.C. Mar. 5, 1980).
2766 (b)(6), attorney's fees, disciplinaryproceedings, exhaustion of admin-istrative remedies, in camera in-spection
Manos v. Dep't of the Air Force, No. C92-3986,1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1501 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 10,1993), partial summary judgment granted (N.D. Cal.Mar. 24, 1993), reconsideration denied (N.D. Cal.Apr. 9, 1993), stay denied, No. 93-15672 (9th Cir.Apr. 20, 1993), emergency stay temporarily granted(9th Cir. Apr. 21, 1993), renewed emergency stay de-nied (9th Cir. Apr. 28, 1993), attorney's fees denied,829 F. Supp. 1191 (N.D. Cal. 1993), ruling on costs(N.D. Cal. Oct. 29, 1993).
2767 Jurisdiction Maple v. Comm'r, T.C. Memo 1990-567 (Oct. 30,1990).
2768 Privacy Act access, (b)(6), exhaus-tion of administrative remedies
Maples v. USDA, No. F97-5663 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 13,1998).
2769 (b)(5), (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), attorney's fees, delib-erative process
Marathon Le Tourneau Co. v. NLRB, 414 F. Supp.1074 (S.D. Miss. 1976).
2770 Mootness, summary judgment Marchesani v. DOJ, No. 86-2561 (D.D.C. Feb. 28,1989).
2771 Discovery/FOIA interface Marchiondo v. Brown, 1 GDS ¶79,200 (D.N.M.1979).
- 195 -
2772 (b)(5), (b)(7)(A), adequacy of re-quest
Marcus v. EPA, No. 91-3270 (D. Md. Jan. 29,1992).
2773 (b)(5), (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), attorney's fees
Maremont Corp. v. NLRB, 91 L.R.R.M. 2645 (W.D.Okla. 1976), rev'd, No. 76-1402 (10th Cir. Oct. 5,1976).
2774 (b)(5), burden of proof, delibera-tive process
Maricopa Audubon Soc'y v. United States ForestServ., No. 94-1339 (D. Ariz. Sept. 25, 1995), aff'd,108 F.3d 1089 (9th Cir. 1997).
2775 (b)(2) Maricopa Audubon Soc'y v. United States ForestServ., 923 F. Supp. 1436 (D.N.M. 1995), aff'd subnom. Audubon Soc'y v. United States Forest Serv.,104 F.3d 1201 (10th Cir. 1997), reh'g denied, No.95-2210 (10th Cir. Mar. 10, 1997).
2776 (b)(2), equitable discretion Maricopa Audubon Soc'y v. United States ForestServ., No. 94-1129 (D. Ariz. Aug. 8, 1995), rev'd &remanded, 108 F.3d 1082 (9th Cir. 1997).
2777 (b)(5), deliberative process, incamera inspection, mootness
Marin Inst. for the Prevention of Drug & Other Al-cohol Problems v. HHS, No. 98-17345, 2000 WL964620 (9th Cir. July 11, 2000) (unpublished memo-randum), 229 F.3d 1158 (9th Cir. 2000) (table cite).
2778 (b)(1), E.O. 11652, E.O. 12065,adequacy of agency affidavit
Marks v. Casey, 2 GDS ¶81,254 (D.D.C. 1981),summary judgment stayed, 2 GDS ¶82,106 (D.D.C.1981), decision on renewed motion for summaryjudgment, 3 GDS ¶82,386 (D.D.C. 1982), renewedmotion for summary judgment granted, 3 GDS ¶82,525 (D.D.C. 1982).
2779 (b)(1), E.O. 11652, (b)(3), 50U.S.C. §403(d)(3), §403g, (b)(7),in camera inspection
Marks v. CIA, 426 F. Supp. 708 (D.D.C. 1976),rev'd, 590 F.2d 997 (D.C. Cir. 1978).
2780 Duty to search Marks v. DOJ, 578 F.2d 261 (9th Cir. 1978).
2781 (b)(1), E.O. 11652, E.O. 12065,agency records
Marks v. Turner, 1 GDS ¶80,151 (D.D.C. 1980),remanded to agency, 2 GDS ¶81,254 (D.D.C.1981), stay granted, 2 GDS ¶82,106 (D.D.C. 1981),motion for summary judgment denied, 3 GDS ¶82,386 (D.D.C. 1982), renewed motion for summaryjudgment granted, 3 GDS ¶82,525 (D.D.C. 1982).
2782 (b)(1), E.O. 11652, (b)(2),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(F),assurance of confidentiality, incamera inspection
Maroscia v. Levi, 569 F.2d 1000 (7th Cir. 1977).
2783 (b)(3), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e), (b)(5),adequacy of request, attorneywork-product privilege, delibera-tive process
Marr v. DOJ, No. 92-0795 (S.D. Ala. Sept. 7,1993).
- 196 -
2784 (b)(5), exhaustion of administra-tive remedies, stay pending appeal
Marrera v. DOJ, Nos. 84-3493, 84-3652 (D.D.C.Feb. 20, 1986), dismissed, No. 84-3652 (D.D.C.Mar. 10, 1986), dismissed in part, No. 84-3493 (D.D.C. Apr. 29, 1986), summary judgment granted,No. 84-3493 (D.D.C. Dec. 9, 1986).
2785 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, (b)(2), (b)(6),adequacy of agency affidavit, dutyto search, "Glomar" denial, moot-ness
Marrera v. DOJ, 622 F. Supp. 51 (D.D.C. 1985),dismissed as moot, No. 84-0232 (D.D.C. Nov. 5,1985).
2786 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies
Marrera v. Dep't of the Treasury, No. 84-3731 (D.D.C. Apr. 23, 1985).
2787 (b)(5), (b)(7), (b)(7)(A),(b)(7)(C), (b)(8), agency records,attorney-client privilege, attorneywork-product privilege, duty tosearch, law enforcement purpose,waiver of exemption
Marriott Employees' Fed. Credit Union v. Nat'lCredit Union Admin., No. 96-478-A (E.D. Va. Dec.24, 1996).
2788 (a)(6)(A), attorney's fees, exhaus-tion of administrative remedies,pro se litigant
Marschner v. Dep't of State, 470 F. Supp. 196 (D.Conn. 1979).
2789 Adequacy of request Marshall-Screen v. IRS, No. 01-CV-0811, 2002 WL264999 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 26, 2002).
2790 Reverse FOIA, (b)(4) Martech USA, Inc. v. Reich, No. C93-4137 (N.D.Cal. Nov. 24, 1993).
2791 Privacy Act access, (b)(1), E.O.12356, FOIA/PA interface
Martens v. Dep't of Commerce, No. 88-3334, 1990U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10351 (D.D.C. Aug. 6, 1990).
2792 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103,(b)(7)(A), attorney's fees
Martenson v. IRS, 2 GDS ¶82,215 (D. Minn. 1981).
2793 (b)(5), (b)(7)(C), deliberativeprocess, law enforcement amend-ments (1986), law enforcementpurpose, summary judgment
Martin v. Dep't of Educ., No. 88-1788 (D.D.C. May31, 1989), summary affirmance granted, No. 89-5284 (D.C. Cir. Apr. 3, 1990).
2794 (b)(7), (b)(7)(C), attorney's fees,exhaustion of administrative rem-edies, law enforcement purpose,reasonably segregable, referral ofrequest to another agency, waiverof exemption
Martin v. DOJ, No. 96-2866 (D.D.C. Dec. 16,1999), attorney's fees denied (D.D.C. Aug. 30,2000).
2795 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, FOIA/PAinterface, in camera affidavit, incamera inspection, reasonablysegregable, Vaughn Index
Martin v. DOJ, No. 83-2674 (W.D. Pa. June 11,1984), summary judgment granted (W.D. Pa. Dec.17, 1984), remanded, No. 85-3091 (3d Cir. Dec. 17,1985) (unpublished memorandum), 782 F.2d 1029(3d Cir. 1985) (table cite), on remand (W.D. Pa.June 5, 1986), aff'd (3d Cir. July 2, 1986) (unpub-lished memorandum), 800 F.2d 1135 (3d Cir. 1986)(table cite), attorney's fees denied (W.D. Pa. July 8,1986).
- 197 -
2796 (b)(6), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D) Martin v. Dep't of the Army, 1 GDS ¶79,120 (D.D.C. 1979).
2797 (b)(5), (b)(7)(D), assurance ofconfidentiality, reasonably segrega-ble, Vaughn Index
Martin v. EEOC, 40 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA)1290 (S.D. Tex. 1986).
2798 Privacy Act access, (b)(3), 5U.S.C. §552a(j)(2), FOIA/PAinterface
Martin v. FBI, Nos. 83-C-123, 83-C-1620, 83-C-1846 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 30, 1983).
2799 (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D) Martin v. HHS, No. 84-5531 (D.C. Cir. Sept. 26,1984).
2800 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(a) Martin v. IRS, 857 F.2d 722 (10th Cir. 1988).
2801 (b)(5), attorney work-productprivilege, deliberative process, in-corporation by reference
Martin v. MSPB, 3 GDS ¶82,416 (D.D.C. 1982),attorney's fees awarded, No. 81-2471 (D.D.C. Aug.27, 1982).
2802 Case or controversy Martin v. Neuschel, 396 F.2d 759 (3d Cir. 1968).
2803 Privacy Act access, (b)(5), attor-ney work-product privilege, delib-erative process, FOIA/PA inter-face, inter- or intra-agency mem-oranda
Martin v. Office of Special Counsel, 819 F.2d 1181(D.C. Cir. 1987).
2804 Interaction of (a)(2) & (a)(3),mootness, proper party defendant
Martin & Merrell, Inc. v. United States CustomsServ., 657 F. Supp. 733 (S.D. Fla. 1986).
2805 Privacy Act access, (b)(1), E.O.12356, (b)(2), (b)(3), 39 U.S.C.§410(c)(6), (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E), adequacy ofagency affidavit, assurance of con-fidentiality, exhaustion of adminis-trative remedies, failure to meettime limits, FOIA/PA interface,leaks, summary judgment, waiverof exemption
Martinez v. FBI, 3 GDS ¶83,005 (D.D.C. 1982),supplemental affidavit ordered, 3 GDS ¶83,208 (D.D.C. 1983), summary judgment granted, No. 82-1547 (D.D.C. Oct. 11, 1983), subsequent decision(D.D.C. Oct. 28, 1983), on in camera inspection(D.D.C. Nov. 9, 1983), summary judgment granted(D.D.C. Dec. 19, 1985).
2806 Exceptional circumstances/due dil-igence
Martinez v. United States Postal Serv., No. 90-1630(D.D.C. Nov. 1, 1990), partial summary judgmentgranted (D.D.C. Feb. 7, 1991), partial summaryjudgment granted (D.D.C. Apr. 25, 1991).
2807 (b)(4), (b)(5), equitable discretion Martin Marietta Aluminum v. GSA, 444 F. Supp.945 (C.D. Cal. 1977).
2808 Reverse FOIA, (b)(4), waiver ofexemption, voluntary submissions
Martin Marietta Corp. v. Dalton, 974 F. Supp. 37(D.D.C. 1997).
2809 Reverse FOIA, (b)(3), 15 U.S.C.§46(f), 18 U.S.C. §1905, (b)(4)
Martin Marietta Corp. v. FTC, 475 F. Supp. 338 (D.D.C. 1979), aff'd, No. 79-1781 (D.C. Cir. May 27,1980).
2810 (b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(7)(A),(b)(7)(C)
Martins Ferry Hosp. Ass'n v. NLRB, 2 GDS ¶81,073(S.D. Ohio 1981), aff'd, 649 F.2d 445 (6th Cir.1981).
- 198 -
2811 (b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(7)(A) Martins Ferry Hosp. Ass'n v. NLRB, No. C2-78-529(S.D. Ohio Feb. 6, 1979).
2812 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(a), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e), (b)(5), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(F), agency,agency records, duty to search,Vaughn Index
Martinson v. Violent Drug Traffickers Project, No.95-2161, 1996 WL 411590 (D.D.C. July 11, 1996),subsequent order (D.D.C. July 16, 1996), summaryjudgment granted in part, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS11658 (D.D.C. Aug. 6, 1996), subsequent order subnom. Martinson v. DEA (D.D.C. Aug. 23, 1996),summary judgment granted in part (D.D.C. Nov. 27,1996), motions to dismiss denied, No. 96-5262(D.C. Cir. Jan. 14, 1997), subsequent decision (D.D.C. Feb. 13, 1997), summary affirmance granted inpart (D.C. Cir. July 3, 1997), summary affirmancegranted (D.C. Cir. Sept. 27, 1997).
2813 (b)(3), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e), (b)(5),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), attorneywork-product privilege, delibera-tive process, in camera inspection
Martorano v. DOJ, 3 GDS ¶82,344 (D.D.C. 1982).
2814 (b)(2), (b)(3), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e),(b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(7)(A),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E),(b)(7)(F), deliberative process, feewaiver (Reform Act), law enforce-ment amendments (1986), statusof plaintiff, summary judgment
Martorano v. FBI, Nos. 89-0377, 89-1345, 89-0813,89-1792, 1991 WL 212521 (D.D.C. Sept. 30, 1991).
2815 (b)(3), 8 U.S.C. §1202(f), reason-ably segregable, waiver of exemp-tion
Marulanda v. Dep't of State, No. 93-1327 (D.D.C.Jan. 31, 1996).
2816 (b)(5), deliberative process, sum-mary judgment
Md. Coalition for Integrated Educ. v. Dep't of Educ.,No. 92-2198 (D.D.C. June 30, 1993).
2817 (b)(5), (b)(7), deliberative process,exhaustion of administrative rem-edies, law enforcement purpose,waiver of exemption
Md. Coalition for Integrated Educ., Inc. v. Dep't ofEduc., No. 89-2851, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10545(D.D.C. July 20, 1992), appeal dismissed, No. 92-5346 (D.C. Cir. Dec. 15, 1993).
2818 Attorney's fees Md. Dep't of Human Resources v. Sullivan, 738 F.Supp. 555 (D.D.C. 1990).
2819 (b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(7)(A),(b)(7)(C), agency records, in cam-era inspection, reasonably segre-gable
Marzen v. HHS, 632 F. Supp. 785 (N.D. Ill. 1986),aff'd, 825 F.2d 1148 (7th Cir. 1987).
2820 (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D),(b)(7)(E), summary judgment,Vaughn Index
Masat v. IRS, No. 86-138 (E.D. Tex. June 5, 1987).
2821 (b)(3), 18 U.S.C. §1905, (b)(4),(b)(5), (b)(7)
M.A. Shapiro & Co. v. SEC, 339 F. Supp. 467 (D.D.C. 1972).
2822 Fees Mason v. Bell, No. 78-719 (E.D. Va. Mar. 16,1979).
- 199 -
2823 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103, §7213,adequacy of request, duty tosearch, no record within scope ofrequest, proper party defendant
Mason v. Hoffman, No. 76-182 (E.D. Va. Mar. 30,1977) (consolidated), aff'd sub nom. Mason v. Calla-way, 554 F.2d 129 (4th Cir. 1977) (consolidated),cert. denied, 434 U.S. 877 (1977), reh'g denied, 434U.S. 935 (1977).
2824 (b)(2), (b)(5), deliberative process Mass. v. HHS, 727 F. Supp. 35 (D. Mass. 1989).
2825 (b)(2), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), as-surance of confidentiality, FOIA asa discovery tool, law enforcementamendments (1986), waiver of ex-emption
Massey v. FBI, No. 89-12C (W.D.N.Y. Feb. 7,1992), aff'd in part, vacated & remanded in part, 3F.3d 620 (2d Cir. 1993).
2826 (b)(7)(C), duty to search, lawenforcement amendments (1986),no improper withholding
Master v. FBI, 926 F. Supp. 193 (D.D.C. 1996),reconsideration denied, No. 95-1755 (D.D.C. Sept.11, 1996), summary affirmance granted, No. 96-5325, 1996 WL 369460 (D.C. Cir. June 2, 1997)(unpublished order), 124 F.3d 1309 (D.C. Cir.1997) (table cite).
2827 Attorney's fees Matlack, Inc. v. EPA, 868 F. Supp. 627 (D. Del.1994).
2828 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies
Matthews v. United States, 2 GDS ¶82,143 (D.Conn. 1979).
2829 (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6), attorney'sfees, deliberative process
Matthews v. United States Postal Serv., No. 92-1208 (W.D. Mo. Apr. 15, 1994).
2830 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies, fee waiver
Matthews v. Webster, No. 78-1217 (S.D. Fla. Nov.16, 1978).
2831 Adequacy of request, agency, dutyto search, failure to meet time lim-its, proper party defendant, properservice of process
Mattingly v. CIA, No. 76-C-3684 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 31,1977).
2832 Privacy Act access, exhaustion ofadministrative remedies, properparty defendant
Matusavage v. United States, No. 85-7385 (E.D. Pa.Mar. 31, 1986).
2833 (b)(7), (b)(7)(A), law enforcementpurpose, summary judgment
Mavadia v. Caplinger, No. 95-3542, 1996 WL592742 (E.D. La. Oct. 11, 1996).
2834 Agency Maxberry v. E. Plasma, No. 87-3022 (6th Cir. Aug.11, 1987) (unpublished memorandum), 826 F.2d1064 (6th Cir. 1987) (table cite).
2835 Attorney's fees Maxwell Broad. Corp. v. FBI, 490 F. Supp. 254(N.D. Tex. 1980).
2836 Adequacy of request, exhaustionof administrative remedies
Maxxam, Inc. v. FDIC, No. 98-0989 (D.D.C. Jan.21, 1999).
2837 (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E),attorney's fees
May v. DOJ, No. 77-264 (D. Me. Oct. 10, 1978).
- 200 -
2838 Privacy Act access, (b)(5), (b)(6),deliberative process, discovery/FOIA interface, duty to create arecord, FOIA/PA interface, incor-poration by reference
May v. Dep't of the Air Force, No. 84-0340 (S.D.Miss. Dec. 7, 1984), aff'd, 777 F.2d 1012 (5th Cir.1985), reh'g & reh'g en banc denied, 800 F.2d 1402(5th Cir. 1986), on remand (S.D. Miss. Mar. 31,1987), dismissed (S.D. Miss. Aug. 11, 1987).
2839 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(a), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e), (b)(5), (b)(7),(b)(7)(C), attorney work-productprivilege, duty to search, law en-forcement purpose, reasonablysegregable, summary judgment
May v. IRS, 85 F. Supp. 2d 939 (W.D. Mo. 1999).
2840 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(a),§6103(e)(7), (b)(7), (b)(7)(A),law enforcement amendments(1986), law enforcement purpose,summary judgment, Vaughn Index
May v. IRS, No. 90-1123 (W.D. Mo. Dec. 9, 1991).
2841 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103, (b)(6),displacement of FOIA
May v. IRS, 3 GDS ¶82,387 (W.D. Mo. 1982).
2842 Exceptional circumstances/due dil-igence
May v. Thornburgh, No. 90-0460 (D.D.C. May 3,1990).
2843 (b)(7)(A), waiver of exemption(failure to assert in litigation)
Maydak v. DOJ, 218 F.3d 760 (D.C. Cir. 2000),reh'g denied, No. 98-5492 (D.C. Cir. Oct. 30,2000), stay granted (D.C. Cir. Nov. 29, 2000), cert.denied, 533 U.S. 950 (2001).
2844 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, (b)(3), 50U.S.C. §403(d)(3), (b)(6),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), attorney'sfees, duty to search, Vaughn Index
Maynard v. DOJ, No. 88-0046 (D. Me. Nov. 14,1990), reconsideration granted in part (D. Me. Feb.1, 1991), aff'd in part, rev'd in part sub nom. May-nard v. CIA, 986 F.2d 547 (1st Cir. 1993).
2845 Agency, preliminary injunction Mayo v. Gov't Printing Office, 839 F. Supp. 697(N.D. Cal. 1992), aff'd, 9 F.3d 1450 (9th Cir. 1993).
2846 (a)(6)(B), attorney's fees, duty tosearch, exceptional circumstances/due diligence, failure to meet timelimits, mootness, Vaughn Index
Mayock v. INS, No. C85-5169 (N.D. Cal. July 6,1988), subsequent decision, 714 F. Supp. 1558(N.D. Cal. 1989), attorney's fees denied, 736 F.Supp. 1561 (N.D. Cal. 1990), subsequent order(N.D. Cal. Sept. 20, 1990), rev'd & remanded subnom. Mayock v. Nelson, 938 F.2d 1006 (9th Cir.1991), panel reh'g en banc denied, No. 89-15977(9th Cir. Dec. 12, 1991).
2847 (b)(2), (b)(7), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(F), assurance ofconfidentiality, reasonably segrega-ble
Mays v. DEA, No. 98-2496 (D.D.C. Sept. 14, 1999),aff'd in part & remanded in part, 234 F.3d 1324(D.C. Cir. 2000).
2848 Attorney's fees MCA, Inc. v. IRS, 434 F. Supp. 212 (C.D. Cal.1977).
2849 Duty to search McAllister v. Dep't of the Army, No. 86-1692 (M.D.Pa. Jan. 22, 1988).
- 201 -
2850 (b)(7), (b)(7)(C), exhaustion ofadministrative remedies, pro seplaintiff, law enforcement purpose
McCall v. United States Marshals Serv., 36 F. Supp.2d 3 (D.D.C. 1999).
2851 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(b)(2),(b)(5), attorney-client privilege,deliberative process
McCarthy v. IRS, No. 87-38 (D. Conn. Sept. 2,1987).
2852 Agency, mootness, statute of limi-tations, Vaughn Index
McClain v. DOJ, No. 97 C 0385, 1999 WL 759505(N.D. Ill. Sept. 1, 1999), aff'd, 17 Fed. Appx. 471(7th Cir. 2001).
2853 Fee waiver (Reform Act), sum-mary judgment
McClain v. DOJ, No. 91-C-0241 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 25,1992), aff'd, 13 F.3d 220 (7th Cir. 1993).
2854 (b)(5), FOIA as a discovery tool McClelland v. Andrus, 606 F.2d 1278 (D.C. Cir.1979).
2855 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies, fee waiver, fee waiver (Re-form Act), FOIA as a discoverytool
McClellan Ecological Seepage Situation (MESS) v.Weinberger, No. 86-264 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 21, 1986),aff'd sub nom. McClellan Ecological Seepage Situa-tion v. Carlucci, 835 F.2d 1282 (9th Cir. 1987).
2856 (b)(3), 18 U.S.C. §2518(8), 39U.S.C. §410(c)(6), Fed.R.Crim.P.6(e), (b)(5), (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E), assurance ofconfidentiality, attorney work-product privilege, deliberativeprocess, Vaughn Index
McCloskey v. DOJ, No. 77-470 (D.D.C. June 14,1978), summary judgment granted (D.D.C. Nov. 8,1978).
2857 No improper withholding McCloud v. Meese, No. 87-3011 (6th Cir. Sept. 30,1987) (unpublished order), 830 F.2d 194 (6th Cir.1987) (table cite).
2858 (b)(5), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D) McCorstin v. Dep't of Labor, 630 F.2d 242 (5th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 999 (1981).
2859 (b)(2), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D),(b)(7)(E), law enforcementamendments (1986), summaryjudgment
McCoy v. Moschella, No. 89-2155, 1991 U.S. Dist.LEXIS 13618 (D.D.C. Sept. 30, 1991).
2860 Reverse FOIA, (b)(3), 18 U.S.C.§1905, 42 U.S.C. §1306, (b)(4)
McCoy v. Weinberger, 386 F. Supp. 504 (W.D. Ky.1974).
2861 (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E),pro se litigant, summary judgment
McCray v. FBI, No. 78-0367 (D.D.C. Aug. 11,1979).
2862 (b)(6), (b)(8), agency records, rea-sonably segregable
McCullough v. FDIC, 1 GDS ¶80,194 (D.D.C.1980).
2863 (b)(7), (b)(7)(C), law enforcementamendments (1986), waiver of ex-emption (failure to assert in litiga-tion)
McCutchen v. HHS, No. 91-0142 (D.D.C. Aug. 24,1992), aff'd in part, rev'd in part, 30 F.3d 183 (D.C.Cir. 1994).
2864 (b)(2), (b)(7)(E), jurisdiction,summary judgment
McDaniel v. DOJ, No. 99-1935 (D.D.C. May 9,2000).
- 202 -
2865 (b)(3), 15 U.S.C. §57b-2(f),(b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(7)(A), attorneywork-product privilege, delibera-tive process, Vaughn Index
McDermott v. FTC, 1 GDS ¶80,254 (D.D.C. 1980),Vaughn Index ordered, 2 GDS ¶81,192 (D.D.C.1981), on motion for summary judgment, 2 GDS¶81,193 (D.D.C. 1981).
2866 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies, proper party defendant
McDonnell v. Clinton, No. 97-1535, 1997 WL33321085 (D.D.C. July 1, 1997), aff'd, No. 97-5179,1997 WL 812536 (D.C. Cir. Dec. 29, 1997) (unpub-lished order), 132 F.3d 1481 (D.C. Cir. 1997) (tablecite).
2867 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, (b)(3), 18U.S.C. §3333(a), §5038, 28 U.S.C.§1868, Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e), (b)(6),(b)(7), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D),(b)(7)(E), assurance of confiden-tiality, attorney's fees, exhaustionof administrative remedies, juris-diction, law enforcement amend-ments (1986), law enforcementpurpose, mootness, status of plain-tiff, waiver of exemption
McDonnell v. United States, No. 88-3682 (D.N.J.June 10, 1991) (magistrate's recommendation),adopted (D.N.J. Sept. 6, 1991), aff'd in part &remanded in part, 4 F.3d 1227 (3d Cir. 1993),attorney's fees awarded, 870 F. Supp. 576 (D.N.J.1994).
2868 Reverse FOIA, (b)(4), customarytreatment, summary judgment,voluntary submissions
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. EEOC, 922 F. Supp.235 (E.D. Mo. 1996).
2869 Reverse FOIA, (b)(4), mootness,voluntary submissions
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. NASA, 981 F. Supp.12 (D.D.C. 1997), reconsideration denied, No. 96-2611 (D.D.C. May 1, 1998), summary affirmancedenied, No. 98-5251 (D.C. Cir. Oct. 15, 1998),rev'd, 180 F.3d 303 (D.C. Cir. 1999), reh'g denied(D.C. Cir. Oct. 6, 1999), on remand, 102 F. Supp.2d 21 (D.D.C. 2000), reconsideration denied, 109 F.Supp. 2d 27 (D.D.C. 2000).
2870 Reverse FOIA, (b)(4), summaryjudgment, voluntary submissions
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. NASA, 895 F. Supp.319 (D.D.C. 1995), vacated & remanded, No. 95-5288 (D.C. Cir. Apr. 1, 1996), dismissed as moot,No. 94-2452 (D.D.C. Apr. 11, 1996).
2871 Reverse FOIA, (b)(4), summaryjudgment, voluntary submissions
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. NASA, No. 93-1540,1993 WL 796612 (D.D.C. Nov. 17, 1993).
2872 Reverse FOIA, (b)(4), voluntarysubmissions
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. NASA, No. 91-3134(D.D.C. Jan. 24, 1992), reconsideration denied (D.D.C. July 9, 1992), subsequent order (D.D.C. July 9,1993), remanded, No. 92-5342 (D.C. Cir. Feb. 14,1994) (unpublished order), 18 F.3d 953 (D.C. Cir.1994) (table cite), on remand, 895 F. Supp. 316 (D.D.C. 1995), aff'd, No. 95-5290 (D.C. Cir. Sept. 17,1996).
2873 (b)(5), (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), assurance of confidenti-ality
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. NLRB, 92 L.R.R.M.2072 (C.D. Cal. 1976).
- 203 -
2874 (b)(1), E.O. 12958, (b)(5), (b)(7),(b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C), agency rec-ords, attorney-client privilege, at-torney work-product privilege, lawenforcement purpose, summaryjudgment
McErlean v. DOJ, No. 97-7831, 1999 WL 791680(S.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 1999).
2875 Privacy Act access, (b)(2), (b)(3),18 U.S.C. §2510, (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(F), summary judgment
McFarland v. DEA, No. 94-620 (D. Colo. Jan. 3,1995).
2876 (b)(7)(C), duty to search, sum-mary judgment
McGann v. DOJ, No. 95-1088, 1995 WL 444341(S.D.N.Y. July 27, 1995), aff'd, No. 95-6191, 1996WL 37330 (2d Cir. Jan. 30, 1996).
2877 (b)(1), E.O. 12065, (b)(3), 50U.S.C. §403(d)(3), §403g, ade-quacy of agency affidavit, discoveryin FOIA litigation, duty to search,referral of request to another agen-cy, summary judgment
McGehee v. CIA, 533 F. Supp. 861 (D.D.C. 1982),rev'd & remanded, 697 F.2d 1095 (D.C. Cir. 1983),vacated in part on panel reh'g, reh'g en banc denied,711 F.2d 1076 (D.C. Cir. 1983).
2878 Privacy Act access, (b)(2),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(F),assurance of confidentiality, rea-sonably segregable, summary judg-ment, waiver of exemption
McGhghy v. DEA, No. C 97-0185 (N.D. Iowa May29, 1998), aff'd, No. 98-2989, 1999 U.S. App.LEXIS 16709 (8th Cir. July 19, 1999).
2879 (b)(3), 49 U.S.C. app. §1905(c),summary judgment
McGilvra v. Nat'l Transp. Safety Bd., 840 F. Supp.100 (D. Colo. 1993).
2880 Jurisdiction McGuire v. Dep't of the Treasury, No. 90-3120(Fed. Cir. Sept. 13, 1990) (unpublished memoran-dum), 915 F.2d 1583 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (table cite).
2881 (b)(3), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E), incamera inspection, Vaughn Index
McGuire v. United States Customs Serv., No. 90-2541 (D.D.C. Apr. 14, 1992), on in camera inspec-tion (D.D.C. May 12, 1992), reconsideration denied(D.D.C. June 19, 1992).
2882 Res judicata McHale v. FBI, No. 99-1628 (D.D.C. Nov. 7, 2000).
2883 (b)(2), (b)(5), (b)(7) McIntyre v. Warner, No. 73-1350 (D.D.C. Oct. 3,1974).
2884 (b)(2), (b)(4), (b)(5), commercialprivilege, deliberative process, ex-haustion of administrative reme-dies, incorporation by reference,reasonably segregable, res judicata,Vaughn Index
MCI Telecomms. Corp. v. GSA, No. 89-0746, 1992WL 71394 (D.D.C. Mar. 25, 1992), subsequentorder (D.D.C. Dec. 23, 1992), summary judgmentgranted (D.D.C. Feb. 27, 1995).
2885 Reverse FOIA, (b)(4) MCI Worldcom, Inc. v. GSA, 163 F. Supp. 2d 28(D.D.C. 2001).
2886 Privacy Act access, (b)(2), (b)(3),5 U.S.C. §552a(j)(2), (b)(7), sum-mary judgment
McKean v. DEA, No. 81-425 (M.D. Fla. May 25,1983).
- 204 -
2887 (a)(1)(D), publication McKenzie v. Heckler, 602 F. Supp. 1150 (D. Minn.1985), supplemental order, 605 F. Supp. 1217 (D.Minn. 1985), rev'd & vacated sub nom. McKenzie v.Bowen, 787 F.2d 1216 (8th Cir. 1986).
2888 Duty to search McKone v. NSA, No. 92-5344 (D.C. Cir. Mar. 25,1993).
2889 (b)(7)(C), duty to search, law en-forcement amendments (1986)
McLaughlin v. Sessions, No. 92-0454, 1993 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 13817 (D.D.C. Sept. 22, 1993).
2890 (b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(7)(C), in cam-era inspection, law enforcementamendments (1986), reasonablysegregable, Vaughn Index
McLeod v. United States Coast Guard, No. 94-1924(D.D.C. July 25, 1995), summary judgment grantedsub nom. McLeod v. Pena (D.D.C. Feb. 9, 1996),summary affirmance granted sub nom. McLeod v.United States Coast Guard, No. 96-5071, 1997 U.S.App. LEXIS 6000 (D.C. Cir. Feb. 10, 1997).
2891 (a)(1)(D), publication McNabb v. Bowen, 829 F.2d 787 (9th Cir. 1987).
2892 (b)(2), (b)(6), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(F), assurance ofconfidentiality, duty to search, norecord within scope of request,Vaughn Index
McNamara v. DOJ, 949 F. Supp. 478 (W.D. Tex.1996), summary judgment granted, 974 F. Supp. 946(W.D. Tex. 1997).
2893 (b)(7)(C), summary judgment McNaughton v. SEC, No. 88-1836 (N.D. Ga. July14, 1989).
2894 (b)(6), FOIA/PA interface McNeal v. DOJ, No. 6-70-890 (E.D. Mich. Nov. 8,1976).
2895 (b)(3), 13 U.S.C. §9 McNichols v. Klutznick, No. 80-1157 (D. Colo.Sept. 17, 1980), rev'd, 644 F.2d 844 (10th Cir.1981), aff'd sub nom. Baldrige v. Shapiro, 455 U.S.345 (1982).
2896 (b)(3), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e),(b)(7)(D), assurance of confiden-tiality, discovery/FOIA interface,duty to search, summary judgment
McQueen v. United States, 179 F.R.D. 522 (S.D.Tex. 1998).
2897 (b)(7)(C), duty to search, sum-mary judgment
McPhillips v. FBI, No. 99-0534 (D.D.C. July 30,1999).
2898 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies
McSheffrey v. Executive Office for the United StatesAttorney, No. 98-0650 (D.D.C. Sept. 9, 1999).
2899 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, (b)(3), 8U.S.C. §1202(f), (b)(7)(C),adequacy of request, attorney'sfees, discovery in FOIA litigation,in camera inspection, "mosaic,"Vaughn Index
McTigue v. DOJ, No. 84-3583 (D.D.C. Dec. 3,1985), on in camera inspection (D.D.C. Feb. 18,1986), aff'd, 808 F.2d 137 (D.C. Cir. 1987), amend-ed, No. 86-5224 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 29, 1987) (unpub-lished order), 809 F.2d 930 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (tablecite), attorney's fees awarded (D.D.C. Aug. 20,1987).
2900 (b)(5), deliberative process, incamera inspection, reasonablysegregable
Mead Data Cent., Inc. v. Dep't of the Air Force, No.76-0202 (D.D.C. 1977), aff'd, 575 F.2d 932 (D.C.Cir. 1978).
- 205 -
2901 (b)(5), attorney-client privilege,deliberative process, de novo re-view, discovery/FOIA interface, incamera inspection, reasonablysegregable, Vaughn Index, waiverof exemption
Mead Data Cent., Inc. v. Dep't of the Air Force, 402F. Supp. 460 (D.D.C. 1975), remanded, 566 F.2d242 (D.C. Cir. 1977).
2902 Duty to search, exceptional cir-cumstances/due diligence
Meade v. Sec'y of the Army, Nos. 93-1010, 94-949(M.D. Fla. Feb. 26, 1995).
2903 (b)(7)(D), assurance of confiden-tiality, exceptional circumstances/due diligence, exhaustion of ad-ministrative remedies
Meador v. United States Parole Comm'n, No. 90-1632 (D.D.C. Jan. 7, 1991), dismissed (D.D.C. Apr.15, 1991).
2904 (b)(5), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), as-surance of confidentiality, reason-ably segregable, summary judg-ment
Means v. Segal, No. 97-1301 (D.D.C. Mar. 18,1998) (magistrate's recommendation), adopted (D.D.C. Apr. 15, 1998), summary affirmance granted,No. 98-5170 (D.C. Cir. Oct. 6, 1998), cert. denied,525 U.S. 1183 (1999).
2905 Status of plaintiff Meddah v. Reno, No. 98-1444 (E.D. Pa. Dec. 3,1998).
2906 Case or controversy, fees (ReformAct), jurisdiction
Media Access Project v. FCC, 883 F.2d 1063 (D.C.Cir. 1989).
2907 (a)(2), publication Medics, Inc. v. Sullivan, 766 F. Supp. 47 (D.P.R.1991).
2908 (b)(3), 8 U.S.C. §1202(f), waiverof exemption (unauthorized re-lease)
Medina-Hincapie v. Dep't of State, 700 F.2d 737(D.C. Cir. 1983).
2909 (b)(3), 50 U.S.C. §403(d)(3),§403g, adequacy of request, "Glo-mar" denial
Medoff v. CIA, 464 F. Supp. 158 (D.N.J. 1978),summary judgment granted, No. 78-733 (D.N.J.Mar. 13, 1979).
2910 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies, fees (Reform Act), fee waiv-er (Reform Act)
Medrano v. DEA, Nos. 95-0703, 96-0734 (D.D.C.July 11, 1997), reconsideration denied (D.D.C. July29, 1997).
2911 Summary judgment Meeker v. IRS, No. 93-3240 (C.D. Ill. May 4, 1994).
2912 Fees Meeks v. Shea, No. 81-5893 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 18,1982).
- 206 -
2913 (b)(1), E.O. 11652, E.O. 12065,(b)(2), (b)(3), 8 U.S.C. §1202(f),26 U.S.C. §6103, 42 U.S.C.§2612(a), 50 U.S.C. §402,§403(d)(3), §403g, Fed.R.Crim.P.6(e), (b)(6), (b)(7), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), assurance of confiden-tiality, attorney's fees, Congres-sional records, discovery in FOIAlitigation, duty to disclose, duty tosearch, improper withholding, incamera inspection, law enforce-ment amendments (1986), sum-mary judgment
Meeropol v. Smith, No. 75-1121 (D.D.C. Feb. 29,1984), aff'd in part & remanded in part sub nom.Meeropol v. Meese, 790 F.2d 942 (D.C. Cir. 1986),on remand sub nom. Meeropol v. Reno (D.D.C.Mar. 24, 1998), motion to compel denied sub nom.Meeropol v. Ashcroft (D.D.C. Aug. 7, 2001), attor-ney's fees granted (D.D.C. Feb. 6, 2002) (magis-trate's recommendation), adopted (D.D.C. Mar. 19,2002).
2914 (b)(5), (b)(7)(A), duty to search,waiver of exemption
Mehl v. EPA, 797 F. Supp. 43 (D.D.C. 1992).
2915 (b)(3), 18 U.S.C. §1426(h),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), FOIA/PAinterface, proper party defendant
Meier v. DOJ, No. 78-3124 (C.D. Cal. June 25,1979).
2916 (b)(7), (b)(7)(C), law enforcementamendments (1986), law enforce-ment purpose, summary judgment
Meirovitz v. FBI, No. 91-1468 (D. Colo. Sept. 24,1993).
2917 Privacy Act access, (b)(2), (b)(5),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), attorney'sfees
Meisler v. DOJ, No. 75-417 (W.D.N.Y. Feb. 24,1977).
2918 Waiver of exemption Melendez-Colon v. United States, 56 F. Supp. 2d142 (D.P.R. 1999).
2919 Privacy Act access, (b)(5), (b)(7),(b)(7)C), (b)(7)(D), assurance ofconfidentiality, deliberative process
Melius v. Nat'l Indian Gaming Comm'n, No. 98-2210, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17537 (D.D.C. Nov. 3,1999).
2920 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies, fees (Reform Act), jurisdic-tion, mootness
Mells v. IRS, No. 99-2030, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS1262 (D.D.C. Jan. 23, 2001).
2921 Agency Melton v. Orange County Democratic Party, No.1:96-517, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17299 (M.D.N.C.Aug. 5, 1998).
2922 (b)(2), (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103,attorney work-product privilege,displacement of FOIA
Menard v. Dep't of the Treasury, 2 GDS ¶81,281(D. Ariz. 1981).
2923 Attorney's fees Mendez-Suarez v. Veles, 698 F. Supp. 905 (N.D. Ga.1988).
2924 (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(E), (b)(7)(F) Mendoza v. DOJ, No. 79-475 (W.D. Tex. Nov. 16,1981).
2925 (b)(2), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D),(b)(7)(E), attorney's fees, properparty defendant
Mendoza v. Dep't of the Treasury, 3 GDS ¶82,419(C.D. Cal. 1981), subsequent decision, 3 GDS ¶82,420 (C.D. Cal. 1981).
- 207 -
2926 Privacy Act access, duty to search Mendoza v. Sec'y of the Army, No. 98-5454, 1999WL 515478 (D.C. Cir. June 23, 1999) (unpublishedorder), 194 F.3d 174 (D.C. Cir. 1999) (table cite).
2927 FOIA as a discovery tool, injunc-tion of agency proceeding pendingresolution of FOIA claim
Mercy Hosp. v. NLRB, 449 F. Supp. 594 (S.D. Iowa1978).
2928 (b)(4), (b)(5), inter- or intra-agen-cy memoranda, summary judg-ment, Vaughn Index
Merit Energy Co. v. Dep't of the Interior, 180 F.Supp. 2d 1184 (D. Colo. 2001).
2929 Vaughn Index Merit Sec. v. IRS, No. 86-2412 (D.D.C. Feb. 10,1987).
2930 Agency MSPB v. Geller, No. 96 C 2768, 1997 U.S. Dist.LEXIS 3959 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 28, 1997).
2931 In camera inspection Mermell v. DOJ, No. 00-1431 (S.D. Fla. Apr. 13,2001).
2932 (b)(8), reasonably segregable Mermelstein v. SEC, 629 F. Supp. 672 (D.D.C.1986).
2933 Discovery in FOIA litigation Merola v. IRS, No. 83-3323 (D.D.C. Sept. 17,1984).
2934 (a)(1)(D), (a)(2)(B), (b)(2),(b)(5), commercial privilege, de-liberative process, prompt disclo-sure, reasonably segregable
Merrill v. Fed. Open Mkt. Comm., 413 F. Supp. 494(D.D.C. 1976), aff'd, 565 F.2d 778 (D.C. Cir. 1977),rev'd & remanded, 443 U.S. 340 (1979), on remand,516 F. Supp. 1028 (D.D.C. 1981).
2935 (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C), injunction ofagency proceeding pending resolu-tion of FOIA claim
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. SEC,39 Ad. L. 2d (P & F) 254 (D.D.C. 1976).
2936 Privacy Act access Mervin v. Bonfanti, 410 F. Supp. 1205 (D.D.C.1976).
2937 (b)(5), attorney work-productprivilege, in camera inspection,reasonably segregable
Mervin v. FTC, No. 76-0686 (D.D.C. Dec. 1, 1976),aff'd, 591 F.2d 821 (D.C. Cir. 1978).
2938 Attorney's fees Messer v. HUD, No. 79-0112 (E.D. Ky. Feb. 28,1985).
2939 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies
Messino v. DEA, No. 94 C 6804, 1995 WL 645704(N.D. Ill. Nov. 1, 1995).
2940 Duty to search, jurisdiction Messino v. IRS, No. 94-1095, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS14464 (W.D. Mo. Sept. 16, 1996).
2941 Dismissal for failure to prosecute Messino v. IRS, No. 95-15 (D.D.C. Sept. 15, 1995).
2942 (b)(7)(C), FOIA as a discoverytool, summary judgment
Metex Corp. v. ACS Indus., 748 F.2d 150 (3d Cir.1984), summary judgment denied, No. 83-0884 (D.N.J. Apr. 30, 1985) (magistrate's recommendation).
- 208 -
2943 Reverse FOIA, (b)(3), 18 U.S.C.§1905, 42 U.S.C. §2000e-8, 44U.S.C. §3508, (b)(4), (b)(6),(b)(7), de novo review, discretion-ary release
Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Usery, 426 F. Supp.150 (D.D.C. 1976), cert. before judgment deniedsub nom. Prudential Ins. Co. v. NOW, 431 U.S. 924(1977), aff'd sub nom. NOW v. Soc. Sec. Admin.,736 F.2d 727 (D.C. Cir. 1984).
2944 Duty to search Metzgar v. CIA, No. 84-1784 (D.D.C. May 30,1985).
2945 (b)(5), agency, agency records, de-liberative process, duty to search
Meyer v. Bush, No. 88-3112 (D.D.C. Sept. 30,1991), stay granted (D.D.C. Dec. 2, 1991), inter-locutory appeal granted, No. 91-8038 (D.C. Cir. Jan.30, 1992), rev'd & remanded, 981 F.2d 1288 (D.C.Cir. 1993), case reopened (D.D.C. Nov. 5, 1993).
2946 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103, (b)(5),(b)(7)(C), burden of proof, delib-erative process, displacement ofFOIA, reasonably segregable,Vaughn Index
Meyer v. Dep't of the Treasury, 82-2 U.S. Tax Cas.(CCH) ¶9678 (W.D. Mich. 1982).
2947 Summary judgment Meyer v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 940 F. Supp. 9 (D.D.C. 1996), summary judgment denied, No. 95-2350 (D.D.C. Nov. 4, 1996).
2948 (b)(3), 5 U.S.C. app. 4 §207(a),summary judgment
Meyerhoff v. EPA, 728 F. Supp. 613 (N.D. Cal.1990), aff'd, 958 F.2d 1498 (9th Cir. 1992).
2949 (b)(4), (b)(6) Miami Herald Publ'g Co. v. SBA, 3 GDS ¶82,396(S.D. Fla. 1979), aff'd, 670 F.2d 610 (5th Cir. 1982).
2950 Mootness Michaels v. IRS, No. 93-1800 (D. Ariz. July 27,1994).
2951 Res judicata Michaels v. United States Postal Serv., No. 85-144(E.D. Tex. Feb. 18, 1986).
2952 (b)(5), attorney work-productprivilege, in camera inspection,inter- or intra-agency memoranda,reasonably segregable
Michelson v. Dep't of Labor, No. 85-2518 (D.D.C.June 30, 1986).
2953 (b)(3), 42 U.S.C. §2000e-5(b),(b)(5), (b)(7)(A), burden of proof,deliberative process
Midwest Alloys, Inc. v. EEOC, No. 80-112 (E.D.Mo. Mar. 31, 1982), partial summary judgmentgranted (E.D. Mo. May 20, 1982), on renewedmotions for summary judgment (E.D. Mo. Dec. 30,1982).
2954 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies, mootness
Mieras v. United States Forest Serv., No. 93-74552(E.D. Mich. Feb. 14, 1995).
2955 (a)(1)(D), publication Mile High Therapy Ctrs., Inc. v. Bowen, 735 F.Supp. 984 (D. Colo. 1988).
2956 (b)(5), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), as-surance of confidentiality, discov-ery/FOIA interface
Miles v. Dep't of Labor, 546 F. Supp. 437 (M.D. Pa.1982).
2957 Attorney's fees Miles v. Fed. Home Loan Bank Bd., No. 84-2527(D.D.C. Nov. 2, 1984).
- 209 -
2958 Attorney's fees, exceptional cir-cumstances/due diligence, expe-dited processing, failure to meettime limits
Milic v. Dep't of State, 3 GDS ¶83,068 (D.D.C.1983).
2959 (b)(1), E.O. 12065, (b)(3), 50U.S.C. §403, discovery in FOIAlitigation, in camera affidavit, incamera inspection, summary judg-ment, waiver of exemption
Military Audit Project v. Bush, 418 F. Supp. 876(D.D.C. 1976), decision on in camera inspection,418 F. Supp. 880 (D.D.C. 1976), procedural motiondenied, No. 76-2037 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 14, 1977), onremand sub nom. Military Audit Project v. Colby,No. 75-2103 (D.D.C. Oct. 4, 1979), aff'd sub nom.Military Audit Project v. Casey, 656 F.2d 724 (D.C.Cir. 1981).
2960 (b)(4), (b)(5), adequacy of agencyaffidavit, deliberative process
Military Audit Project v. Kettles, No. 75-0666 (D.D.C. May 17, 1976).
2961 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, (b)(3), 50U.S.C. §403(d)(3), "Glomar" de-nial, publication
Miller v. Casey, 3 GDS ¶83,095 (D.D.C. 1982),aff'd, 730 F.2d 773 (D.C. Cir. 1984).
2962 (b)(1), E.O. 12065, (b)(3), 50U.S.C. §403, (b)(5), Congressionalrecords, de novo review
Miller v. CIA, 2 GDS ¶81,174 (D.D.C. 1981).
2963 (b)(2), mootness, summary judg-ment
Miller v. DOJ, No. 87-0533, 1989 WL 10598 (D.D.C. Jan. 31, 1989).
2964 Agency records, duty to search,improper withholding
Miller v. Dep't of the Army, No. 85-3622 (D.D.C.Mar. 26, 1986).
2965 Attorney's fees, disciplinary pro-ceedings, summary judgment
Miller v. Dep't of the Treasury, No. 92-0383 (D.D.C. Mar. 10, 1994).
2966 Dismissal for failure to prosecute Miller v. FBI, No. 84-1704 (D.D.C. Dec. 21, 1984).
2967 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, adequacy ofagency affidavit, attorney's fees,belated classification, duty tocreate a record, duty to search,proper party defendant
Miller v. Schultz, No. 3-82-788 (D. Minn. July 11,1984), aff'd in part, vacated & remanded in part subnom. Miller v. Dep't of State, 779 F.2d 1378 (8th Cir.1985).
2968 (b)(5) Miller v. Smith, 292 F. Supp. 55 (S.D.N.Y. 1968).
2969 (b)(7), (b)(7)(A), law enforcementamendments (1986), law enforce-ment purpose
Miller v. United States, No. 90-1034 (D.S.D. Apr. 2,1992), rev'd & remanded sub nom. Miller v. Dep't ofAgric., 13 F.3d 260 (8th Cir. 1993).
2970 (b)(7), (b)(7)(D), exhaustion ofadministrative remedies, FOIA/PA interface, law enforcementpurpose
Miller v. United States, 630 F. Supp. 347 (E.D.N.Y.1986).
- 210 -
2971 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), adequacy of request,assurance of confidentiality, at-torney's fees, disciplinary proceed-ings, FOIA/PA interface, properparty defendant, Vaughn Index
Miller v. Webster, 483 F. Supp. 883 (N.D. Ill. 1979),aff'd in part, rev'd in part sub nom. Miller v. Bell,661 F.2d 623 (7th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 456 U.S.960 (1982), subsequent decision sub nom. Miller v.Webster, No. 77-C-3331 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 27, 1983),summary judgment granted (N.D. Ill. Feb. 29,1984), remanded, No. 84-2074 (7th Cir. Dec. 10,1984), summary judgment denied sub nom. Miller v.Dir. of the FBI, 1987 WL 18331 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 7,1987), summary judgment granted sub nom. Millerv. Sessions (N.D. Ill. Mar. 21, 1988), reconsidera-tion denied, 1988 WL 45519 (N.D. Ill. May 2,1988).
2972 (b)(4), promise of confidentiality Miller, Anderson, Nash, Yerke & Wiener v. DOE,499 F. Supp. 767 (D. Or. 1980).
2973 (b)(7)(A), waiver of exemption Miller Auto Sales v. Casellas, No. 97-0032 (W.D.Va. Jan. 6, 1998).
2974 Fee waiver, FOIA/PA interface Mills v. McCreight, 1 GDS ¶79,151 (D.D.C. 1979).
2975 Proper service of process Mills v. United States, No. 95-0663 (D. Ariz. Sept.7, 1995).
2976 (b)(5) Mims v. United States, No. 8935 (D.N.M. July 8,1971).
2977 (b)(3), 18 U.S.C. §4208(b), Fed.R.Crim.P. 32, (b)(5), deliberativeprocess, inter- or intra-agencymemoranda, waiver of exemption
Mineo v. DOJ, No. 84-3899 (D.D.C. Apr. 30,1985), rev'd, 804 F.2d 701 (D.C. Cir. 1986) (con-solidated), reh'g denied, 806 F.2d 1122 (D.C. Cir.1986) (consolidated), cert. granted, judgment va-cated & remanded, 486 U.S. 1029 (1988) (consoli-dated).
2978 (b)(3), 50 U.S.C. §403g, §403-3(c)(5), Vaughn Index
Minier v. CIA, 88 F.3d 796 (9th Cir. 1996).
2979 (b)(1), (b)(5), disclosure to Con-gress, in camera inspection
Mink v. EPA, No. 71-1614 (D.D.C. Aug. 27, 1971),rev'd, 464 F.2d 742 (D.C. Cir. 1971), rev'd, 410 U.S.73 (1973).
2980 Discovery in FOIA litigation Minneapolis Star & Tribune Co. v. Dep't of the In-terior, 623 F. Supp. 577 (D. Minn. 1985).
2981 (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(7)(E), deliber-ative process, discretionary release,promise of confidentiality
Minn. v. DOE, No. 4-81-434 (D. Minn. Dec. 14,1982).
2982 Attorney's fees Minn. Mining & Mfg. Co. v. GSA, No. 77-0306 (D.D.C. Aug. 10, 1977).
2983 Jurisdiction Minnich v. MSPB, No. 94-3587 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 21,1995) (per curiam) (unpublished order), 50 F.3d 21(Fed. Cir. 1995) (table cite).
2984 (b)(6), exhaustion of administra-tive remedies, res judicata
Minnis v. USDA, 3 GDS ¶83,232 (D. Or. 1983),rev'd, 737 F.2d 784 (9th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 471U.S. 1053 (1985).
2985 (b)(6), proper party defendant Minnis v. USDA, 3 GDS ¶83,231 (D. Or. 1981).
- 211 -
2986 (b)(3), 42 U.S.C. §1320c-9,(b)(4), (b)(6), voluntary sub-missions
Minntech Corp. v. HHS, No. 92-2720 (D.D.C. Nov.17, 1993).
2987 Privacy Act access, (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), assurance of confiden-tiality, mootness
Minor v. EEOC, No. 81-2988 (W.D. Tenn. Dec. 5,1983) (magistrate's recommendation), adopted(W.D. Tenn. Dec. 22, 1983), vacated & remanded,No. 84-5162 (6th Cir. Sept. 20, 1984) (unpublishedmemorandum), 745 F.2d 57 (6th Cir. 1984) (tablecite), dismissed (W.D. Tenn. Mar. 18, 1985) (ma-gistrate's recommendation), adopted (W.D. Tenn.Sept. 16, 1986).
2988 (a)(1)(D), (a)(2)(C), publication Minority Bus. Legal Def. & Educ. Fund, Inc. v. SBA,557 F. Supp. 37 (D.D.C. 1982).
2989 Jurisdiction, personal records Miranda Manor, Ltd. v. HHS, No. 85-C-10015(N.D. Ill. Apr. 7, 1986).
2990 (b)(5), (b)(7), deliberative process,in camera inspection, law enforce-ment purpose
Miscavige v. IRS, No. 91-3721 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 9,1992).
2991 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(a),§6103(e)(7), (b)(5), (b)(7)(A),discovery in FOIA litigation, incamera inspection, law enforce-ment amendments (1986), sum-mary judgment, Vaughn Index
Miscavage v. IRS, No. 1:91-1638, 1993 WL 389808(N.D. Ga. June 15, 1992), aff'd, 2 F.3d 366 (11th Cir.1993).
2992 (b)(3), 35 U.S.C. §122, (b)(4),(b)(5), mootness
Misegades & Douglas v. Schuyler, 328 F. Supp. 619(E.D. Va. 1971), dismissed as moot, 456 F.2d 255(4th Cir. 1972).
2993 (b)(3), 35 U.S.C. §122, attorney'sfees, leaks
Misegades, Douglas & Levy v. Sonneberg, 76 F.R.D.384 (E.D. Va. 1976), summary judgment granted,No. 76-481 (E.D. Va. Jan. 13, 1977).
2994 Adequacy of request Miss. Ass'n of Coops. v. Farmers Home Admin., 139F.R.D. 542 (D.D.C. 1991).
2995 (b)(5), deliberative process Missouri ex rel. Shorr v. United States Army Corpsof Eng'rs, 147 F.3d 708 (8th Cir. 1998).
2996 (b)(3), 15 U.S.C. §46(f), (b)(4),(b)(5), (b)(7), adequacy of agencyaffidavit, mootness
Mo. Portland Cement Co. v. FTC, 1972 Trade Cas.(CCH) ¶74,124 (D.D.C. 1972).
2997 (b)(2), (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(E), incamera inspection, summary judg-ment
Misterek v. IRS, No. C87-421 (W.D. Wash. Nov.16, 1987).
2998 (b)(5), stay pending appeal Mitchell v. DOJ, No. 85-3727 (D.D.C. Oct. 10,1986), dismissed (D.D.C. Jan. 14, 1987).
2999 (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), assurance ofconfidentiality, discovery in FOIAlitigation
Mitchell v. IRS, 1 GDS ¶80,103 (W.D. Okla. 1980).
- 212 -
3000 Jurisdiction Mitchell v. Kemp, No. 91-2983 (S.D.N.Y. July 27,1992), aff'd, No. 92-6301 (2d Cir. June 11, 1993)(unpublished order), 999 F.2d 536 (2d Cir. 1993)(table cite).
3001 (b)(7)(D) Mitchell v. Ralston, No. 81-4478 (S.D. Ill. Oct. 14,1982).
3002 Res judicata Mitchell v. Smith, No. 82-1525 (D.D.C. Nov. 15,1982).
3003 (b)(4), (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(D),exceptional circumstances/due dil-igence, FOIA as a discovery tool
Mitsubishi Elec. Corp. v. DOJ, 39 Ad. L. 2d (P & F)1133 (D.D.C. 1976), summary judgment granted,No. 76-0813 (D.D.C. Apr. 1, 1977).
3004 (b)(7), (b)(7)(D), assurance ofconfidentiality, law enforcementamendments (1986), law enforce-ment purpose, waiver of exemption
Mittleman v. OPM, No. 92-0158 (D.D.C. Jan. 18,1995), summary affirmance granted, 76 F.3d 1240(D.C. Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1123(1997).
3005 Privacy Act access, exhaustion ofadministrative remedies
Mittleman v. United States Treasury, 773 F. Supp.442 (D.D.C. 1991).
3006 (b)(3), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e), duty tocreate a record, exhaustion of ad-ministrative remedies, summaryjudgment
M.K. v. DOJ, No. 96-1307, 1996 WL 509724 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 1, 1996).
3007 Duty to search Moawad v. DOJ, No. 97-1361, 1998 WL 185503(D.D.C. Apr. 8, 1998).
3008 Transfer of FOIA case Mobil Corp. v. SEC, 550 F. Supp. 67 (S.D.N.Y.1982).
3009 Discretionary release, waiver of ex-emption
Mobil Oil Corp. v. EPA, 879 F.2d 698 (9th Cir.1989).
3010 (b)(3), 15 U.S.C. §46(f), (b)(4),(b)(5), (b)(7), (b)(7)(A),(b)(7)(D), assurance of confidenti-ality, attorney work-product privi-lege, Vaughn Index
Mobil Oil Corp. v. FTC, 406 F. Supp. 305 (S.D.N.Y.1976), decision on reh'g, 430 F. Supp. 849 (S.D.N.Y.1977), subsequent decision, No. 74-311 (S.D.N.Y.Dec. 7, 1978), summary judgment granted (S.D.N.Y. July 3, 1979).
3011 Attorney's fees Mobley v. IRS, 42 A.F.T.R. 2d 78-5359 (N.D. Cal.1978).
3012 (b)(7), (b)(7)(A), law enforcementpurpose, Vaughn Index, waiver ofexemption
Moceo v. FBI, No. C85-20072 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 20,1985).
3013 Privacy Act access, (b)(1), E.O.12356, (b)(3), 50 U.S.C.§403(d)(3), §403g, FOIA/PAinterface, in camera inspection,reasonably segregable, summaryjudgment
Moessmer v. CIA, No. 86-948 (E.D. Mo. Feb. 19,1987), summary judgment granted (E.D. Mo. Sept.3, 1987), aff'd, No. 88-1218 (8th Cir. Nov. 15, 1988)(unpublished memorandum), 871 F.2d 1092 (8th
Cir. 1988) (table cite).
3014 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(b)(2),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(E), summaryjudgment
Monpas v. IRS, No. 92-51 (D. Or. July 7, 1992)(magistrate's recommendation).
- 213 -
3015 Proper party defendant, summaryjudgment
Monroe v. IRS, No. 4:97-071 (N.D. Tex. Oct. 21,1998).
3016 (b)(5), (b)(7) Monsanto Co. v. Dawson Chem. Co., 176 U.S. P.Q.(BNA) 349 (S.D. Tex. 1972).
3017 Mootness Montgomery v. Scott, 802 F. Supp. 930 (W.D.N.Y.1992).
3018 Attorney's fees, mootness Montrose Chem. Corp. v. EPA, No. C84-6355(N.D. Cal. Mar. 23, 1985), motion to amend denied(N.D. Cal. May 17, 1985), appeal dismissed, No. 85-2292 (9th Cir. Nov. 7, 1985).
3019 (b)(5), deliberative process, rea-sonably segregable
Montrose Chem. Corp. v. Ruckelshaus, No. 72-1797(D.D.C. Feb. 16, 1973), rev'd sub nom. MontroseChem. Corp. v. Train, 491 F.2d 63 (D.C. Cir. 1974).
3020 (b)(2), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D),(b)(7)(F), adequacy of agency affi-davit, discovery in FOIA litigation,summary judgment
Moody v. DEA, No. 83-2582 (D.D.C. Mar. 12,1984), partial summary judgment granted (D.D.C.June 18, 1984), summary judgment granted, 592 F.Supp. 556 (D.D.C. 1984).
3021 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103 Moody v. IRS, No. 82-3134 (D.D.C. Apr. 12, 1983).
3022 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103, (b)(5),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), attorneywork-product privilege, displace-ment of FOIA, summary judg-ment, waiver of exemption
Moody v. IRS, 1 GDS ¶80,055 (D.D.C. 1980), re-manded, 654 F.2d 795 (D.C. Cir. 1981), on remand,527 F. Supp. 535 (D.D.C. 1981), rev'd in part & re-manded, 682 F.2d 266 (D.C. Cir. 1982), summaryjudgment granted, 52 A.F.T.R. 2d 83-6329 (D.D.C.1983).
3023 (b)(1), E.O. 12065, (b)(3), 50U.S.C. §402, disclosure to Con-gress, referral of request to anotheragency, waiver of exemption (ad-ministrative release)
Moon v. CIA, 514 F. Supp. 836 (S.D.N.Y. 1981).
3024 Duty to search Mooney v. VA, No. 90-1628 (1st Cir. Dec. 3, 1990)(unpublished memorandum), 923 F.2d 840 (1st Cir.1990) (table cite).
3025 Duty to search Moore v. Aspin, 916 F. Supp. 32 (D.D.C. 1996).
3026 (b)(5), (b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E), attor-ney's fees, deliberative process
Moore v. Dep't of the Treasury, 2 GDS ¶82,085(S.D. Ohio 1981).
3027 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, (b)(7)(C),discovery in FOIA litigation,Vaughn Index, waiver of exemp-tion (administrative release)
Moore v. FBI, No. 83-1541, 1984 U.S. Dist. LEXIS18732 (D.D.C. Mar. 9, 1984), aff'd, 762 F.2d 138(D.C. Cir. 1985).
3028 (b)(2), (b)(7)(C), proper party de-fendant, summary judgment
Moore v. United States Marshals Serv., No. 90-3224(D. Kan. Sept. 30, 1992).
3029 (b)(7), (b)(7)(A), law enforcementpurpose
Moorefield v. United States Secret Serv., No. C77-906 (N.D. Ga. Feb. 8, 1978), aff'd, 611 F.2d 1021(5th Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 909 (1980).
3030 (b)(5), (b)(7) Moore-McCormack Line v. I.T.O. Corp., 508 F.2d945 (4th Cir. 1974).
- 214 -
3031 (b)(1), E.O. 12958, (b)(2), (b)(7),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), assurance ofconfidentiality, in camera inspec-tion, law enforcement purpose,reasonably segregable
Morales Cozier v. FBI, No. 1:99-0312 (N.D. Ga.Sept. 25, 2000), on reconsideration (N.D. Ga. Jan.2, 2001).
3032 Proper party defendant Moran v. Doctor, No. 88-1837 (D.D.C. Oct. 3,1988).
3033 Privacy Act access, (b)(2),(b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D),(b)(7)(F)
Moran v. DEA, No. 78-2831 (S.D. Fla. July 3,1979).
3034 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies
Morello v. DOJ, No. 90-1078 (D.D.C. Oct. 16,1990), summary affirmance granted, 948 F.2d 1337(D.C. Cir. 1991).
3035 Jurisdiction Morgan v. DOJ, No. 89-0527 (D.D.C. Oct. 13,1989), summary affirmance denied, No. 89-5469(D.C. Cir. May 10, 1990), rev'd & remanded, 923F.2d 195 (D.C. Cir. 1991).
3036 (b)(5), deliberative process Morgan v. DOJ, No. 89-0196 (D.D.C. June 16,1989), summary judgment granted (D.D.C. Oct. 13,1989), vacated & remanded, No. 89-5477 (D.C.Cir. Nov. 13, 1990) (unpublished order), 923 F.2d201 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (table cite).
3037 (b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E) Morgan v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, No. 84-3342 (D.D.C. Feb. 28, 1985).
3038 (b)(3), (b)(4), summary judgment Morgan v. FDA, No. 70-1928 (D.D.C. July 6, 1971),aff'd, No. 71-1709 (D.C. Cir. May 24, 1974) (un-published memorandum), 495 F.2d 1075 (D.C. Cir.1974) (table cite).
3039 Summary judgment Morgan v. Huff, No. 85-1699 (D. Md. June 23,1986).
3040 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies, proper party defendant
Morpurgo v. Bd. of Higher Educ., 423 F. Supp. 704(S.D.N.Y. 1976).
3041 Transfer of FOIA case, venue Morrell v. DOJ, No. 96-4356, 1996 WL 732499(N.D. Cal. Dec. 16, 1996).
3042 Adequacy of request, attorney'sfees, duty to search, proper partydefendant
Morris v. Comm'r, No. F-97-5031, 1997 U.S. Dist.LEXIS 21030 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 19, 1997).
3043 Duty to search Morris v. Comm'r, No. 95-6026, 1996 U.S. Dist.LEXIS 14917 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 23, 1996).
3044 Improper withholding Morris v. DOJ, 540 F. Supp. 898 (S.D. Tex. 1982).
3045 (b)(5), deliberative process, dis-covery in FOIA litigation, sum-mary judgment
Morrison v. DOJ, No. 87-3394, 1988 WL 47662 (D.D.C. Apr. 29, 1988).
3046 (b)(5), commercial privilege Morrison-Knudsen Co. v. Dep't of the Army, 595 F.Supp. 352 (D.D.C. 1984), aff'd, 762 F.2d 138 (D.C.Cir. 1985).
- 215 -
3047 Exceptional circumstances/due dil-igence
Morrow v. FBI, No. 92-2399 (N.D. Tex. Jan. 26,1993) (magistrate's recommendation), adopted(N.D. Tex. Feb. 5, 1993), vacated & remanded, 2F.3d 642 (5th Cir. 1993).
3048 (a)(1)(D), publication Morton v. Ruiz, 415 U.S. 199 (1974).
3049 (b)(2), (b)(5), in camera inspec-tion, reasonably segregable
Morton-Norwich Prods., Inc. v. Mathews, 415 F.Supp. 78 (D.D.C. 1976).
3050 Case or controversy Moscony v. FBI, No. 90-2064 (D.N.J. Dec. 21,1994), aff'd, No. 95-5038 (3d Cir. Apr. 17, 1995).
3051 Exceptional circumstances/due dil-igence, exhaustion of administra-tive remedies, expedited process-ing, failure to meet time limits,FOIA as a discovery tool
Moskowitz v. Kelley, No. 77-C-705 (E.D.N.Y. July23, 1977).
3052 (b)(1) Moss v. Laird, No. 71-1254 (D.D.C. Dec. 7, 1971).
3053 Adequacy of request, mootness Moss v. Office of Special Counsel, MSPB, No. C3-89-067 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 10, 1989) (magistrate'srecommendation).
3054 Attorney's fees Mosser Constr. Co. v. Dep't of Labor, No. 3:93-7525(N.D. Ohio Mar. 29, 1994).
3055 (b)(3), 15 U.S.C. §1314(g) Motion Picture Ass'n v. DOJ, No. 80-6612 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 6, 1981).
3056 Proper party defendant Mott v. Clauson, Cause No. S87-0045 (N.D. Ind.Mar. 10, 1988).
3057 Attorney's fees, fee waiver Mountain v. Dep't of Labor, No. 83-380 (D. Nev.Aug. 17, 1984).
3058 (b)(2), (b)(3), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e),(b)(5), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D),(b)(7)(E), (b)(7)(F), in camerainspection, summary judgment
Mountain Coin Mach. Distribs. v. DOJ, No. 87-122(S.D. Iowa Sept. 22, 1988), summary judgment de-nied (S.D. Iowa Dec. 14, 1988), on in camera in-spection (S.D. Iowa June 28, 1991).
3059 (b)(3), 19 U.S.C. §1677f, (b)(4),summary judgment
Mudge Rose Guthrie Alexander & Ferdon v. UnitedStates Int'l Trade Comm'n, No. 86-1650 (D.D.C.June 2, 1987), remanded, 846 F.2d 1527 (D.C. Cir.1988).
3060 (b)(6), (b)(7), (b)(7)(C), law en-forcement purpose, summary judg-ment
Mueller v. Dep't of the Air Force, 63 F. Supp. 2d738 (E.D. Va. 1999).
3061 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies, mootness
Mueller v. United States Navy, No. 98-8268 (C.D.Cal. Mar. 24, 1999).
3062 Attorney's fees, fees (Reform Act) Muffoletto v. Sessions, 760 F. Supp. 268 (E.D.N.Y.1991).
3063 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies
Muhammad v. Bureau of Prisons, 789 F. Supp. 449(D.D.C. 1992).
- 216 -
3064 (b)(2), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D),(b)(7)(E), (b)(7)(F), summaryjudgment
Muhammad v. DOJ, Nos. 87-2049, 87-2237 (D.D.C. Oct. 4, 1988).
3065 Duty to search Muir v. United States, No. 95-1791, 1999 U.S. Dist.LEXIS 4269 (D. Ariz. Mar. 9, 1999).
3066 (b)(3), 15 U.S.C. §2055(a)(2),§2055(b)(5), (b)(4), promise ofconfidentiality, Vaughn Index
Mulloy v. Consumer Prod. Safety Comm'n, No. C2-85-0645, 1985 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17194 (S.D. OhioAug. 2, 1985), aff'd, No. 85-3720 (6th Cir. July 22,1986) (unpublished memorandum), 798 F.2d 1415(6th Cir. 1986) (table cite).
3067 (b)(6), attorney's fees Multnomah County Med. Soc'y v. Scott, No. 85-0832 (D. Or. Nov. 14, 1985), aff'd, 825 F.2d 1410(9th Cir. 1987).
3068 (b)(6), proper party defendant Muntner v. INS, No. 3-80-624 (D. Minn. Feb. 5,1982).
3069 Publication Murdock v. United States, No. C90-0071 (D. UtahJuly 2, 1990).
3070 Disclosure to Congress, discretion-ary release, waiver of exemption(administrative release)
Murphy v. Dep't of the Army, 613 F.2d 1151 (D.C.Cir. 1979).
3071 (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), waiver of ex-emption
Murphy v. FBI, No. 79-0919 (W.D. Mo. Sept. 1,1981).
3072 (b)(3), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e),(b)(7)(A), discovery in FOIA liti-gation, in camera affidavit, leaks,Vaughn Index, waiver of exemp-tion (unauthorized release)
Murphy v. FBI, 490 F. Supp. 1134 (D.D.C. 1980),summary judgment granted, 490 F. Supp. 1138 (D.D.C. 1980), summary judgment vacated as moot,No. 80-1612 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 8, 1981).
3073 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(a),§6103(e)(1), (b)(7), (b)(7)(C),adequacy of agency affidavit, dutyto search, law enforcement pur-pose, summary judgment
Murphy v. IRS, 79 F. Supp. 2d 1180 (D. Haw.1999).
3074 (b)(5), attorney-client privilege,deliberative process, jurisdiction,reasonably segregable, settlementdocuments, waiver of exemption
Murphy v. TVA, 559 F. Supp. 58 (D.D.C. 1983),summary judgment granted, 571 F. Supp. 502 (D.D.C. 1983).
3075 Attorney's fees Murty v. OPM, 3 GDS ¶83,253 (E.D. Va. 1982),aff'd, 707 F.2d 815 (4th Cir. 1983).
3076 (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(F), waiver of ex-emption
Myers v. DOJ, No. 85-1746, 1986 U.S. Dist. LEXIS20058 (D.D.C. Sept. 22, 1986).
3077 (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D),FOIA as a discovery tool
Mylan Pharms. v. NLRB, 407 F. Supp. 1124 (W.D.Pa. 1976).
3078 (b)(5), deliberative process, sum-mary judgment, waiver of exemp-tion
Myles-Pirzada v. Dep't of the Army, No. 91-1080(D.D.C. Nov. 20, 1992).
- 217 -
3079 (b)(5), inter- or intra-agency mem-oranda, settlement documents
NAACP Legal Def. & Educ. Fund v. DOJ, 612 F.Supp. 1143 (D.D.C. 1985).
3080 (b)(3), 35 U.S.C. §122 Nabisco Brands, Inc. v. Mossinghoff, No. 84-1723(D.N.J. June 11, 1985).
3081 Jurisdiction Nachbaur v. NLRB, No. 76-6172 (S.D.N.Y. 1977),appeal dismissed, 559 F.2d 1204 (2d Cir. 1977).
3082 Jurisdiction Nadeau v. IRS, No. 97-1338, 1997 WL 422226 (1st
Cir. July 29, 1997) (per curiam) (unpublished mem-orandum), 121 F.3d 695 (1st Cir. 1997) (table cite).
3083 (b)(5) Nader v. Dunlop, 370 F. Supp. 177 (D.D.C. 1973).
3084 Privacy Act access, (a)(2), (b)(3),Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e), (b)(5), (b)(7),(b)(7)(A), attorney work-productprivilege, exhaustion of adminis-trative remedies, FOIA/PA inter-face, proper party defendant, sum-mary judgment
Nader v. ICC, No. 82-1037, 1983 U.S. Dist. LEXIS11380 (D.D.C. Nov. 23, 1983).
3085 (b)(5), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D),assurance of confidentiality, at-torney work-product privilege,deliberative process, law enforce-ment amendments (1986), waiverof exemption
Nadler v. DOJ, No. 88-1454 (S.D. Fla. Mar. 30,1990), rev'd & remanded, 955 F.2d 1479 (11th Cir.1992).
3086 (b)(4), summary judgment, volun-tary submissions
Nadler v. FDIC, 899 F. Supp. 158 (S.D.N.Y. 1995),aff'd, 92 F.3d 93 (2d Cir. 1996).
3087 (b)(3), 25 U.S.C. §3001, (b)(6),agency records, equitable discre-tion
Na Iwi O Na Kupuna v. Dalton, 894 F. Supp. 1397(D. Haw. 1995).
3088 Fees (Reform Act), fee waiver(Reform Act), no record withinscope of request
Nance v. United States Postal Serv., No. 91-1183(D.D.C. Sept. 24, 1991), summary judgment grant-ed, 1992 WL 23655 (D.D.C. Jan. 24, 1992).
3089 Exceptional circumstances/due dil-igence, expedited processing
Narducci v. DOJ, No. 91-2972 (D.D.C. June 16,1992), reconsideration granted in part (D.D.C. July24, 1992).
3090 (b)(2), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D),(b)(7)(F), summary judgment
Narducci v. DEA, No. 96-1873 (D.D.C. Jan. 10,1997).
3091 Exceptional circumstances/due dil-igence
Narducci v. FBI, No. 98-0130 (D.D.C. July 17,1998), reconsideration denied (D.D.C. Aug. 17,1998).
3092 (b)(7)(A), summary judgment Narducci v. FBI, No. 93-0327 (D.D.C. Sept. 22,1995).
3093 Attorney's fees, mootness Nash v. DOJ, 992 F. Supp. 447 (D.D.C. 1998),summary affirmance granted, No. 98-5096 (D.C.Cir. July 20, 1998), reh'g denied (D.C. Cir. Oct. 9,1998).
- 218 -
3094 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(a), (b)(5),(b)(7)(C), attorney-client privi-lege, deliberative process, law en-forcement amendments (1986)
Natal Contracting & Bldg. Corp. v. IRS, No. 91-5037 (E.D.N.Y. July 30, 1993).
3095 (b)(3), 49 U.S.C. §1472, §1504, incamera inspection
Nat'l Airlines v. CAB, No. 75-613 (D.D.C. Oct. 10,1975).
3096 (b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), adequacy of agencyaffidavit, assurance of confiden-tiality, attorney work-productprivilege, deliberative process,discretionary release, reasonablysegregable, Vaughn Index, waiverof exemption
Nat'l Ass'n of Arab Ams. v. DOJ, No. 83-0984 (D.D.C. Feb. 20, 1985), subsequent decision (D.D.C.June 10, 1985), reconsideration denied (D.D.C. July24, 1985), summary judgment granted (D.D.C. Apr.14, 1986), all district court opinions vacated & re-manded, Nos. 85-5878, 85-5917 (D.C. Cir. Aug. 26,1986).
3097 (b)(6), attorney's fees, discovery inFOIA litigation, FOIA/PA inter-face
Nat'l Ass'n of Atomic Veterans v. Dir., Def. NuclearAgency, No. 81-2662 (D.D.C. Sept. 12, 1983), sum-mary judgment granted, 583 F. Supp. 1483 (D.D.C.1984), attorney's fees granted (D.D.C. July 15,1987).
3098 (a)(1), (a)(2), attorney's fees, pub-lication
Nat'l Ass'n of Concerned Veterans v. Sec'y of Def.,487 F. Supp. 192 (D.D.C. 1979), on motion for at-torney's fees, 3 GDS ¶82,537 (D.D.C. 1981), vaca-ted & remanded, 675 F.2d 1319 (D.C. Cir. 1982).
3099 (b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(7)(C), attor-ney's fees, deliberative process,inter- or intra-agency memoranda,preliminary injunction, reasonablysegregable, waiver of exemption,waiver of exemption (unauthorizedrelease)
Nat'l Ass'n of Criminal Def. Lawyers v. DOJ, No.97-372 (D.D.C. Mar. 17, 1997) (transcript), interimattorney's fees granted in part (D.D.C. June 26,1998), subsequent opinion (D.D.C. July 22, 1998),appeal dismissed, 182 F.3d 981 (D.C. Cir. 1999),partial summary judgment granted (D.D.C. Oct. 1,1999), reconsideration granted (D.D.C. Dec. 28,1999).
3100 (b)(3), 5 U.S.C. §8092, (b)(4),burden of proof, promise of confi-dentiality, summary judgment
Nat'l Ass'n of Gov't Employees v. Hampton, No. 76-1041 (D.D.C. June 11, 1976), summary judgmentdenied (D.D.C. Sept. 3, 1976), aff'd in part, rev'd inpart & remanded sub nom. Nat'l Ass'n of Gov't Em-ployees v. Campbell, 593 F.2d 1023 (D.C. Cir.1978), on remand, 1 GDS ¶80,129 (D.D.C. 1980).
3101 (b)(5), (b)(6) Nat'l Ass'n of Postal Supervisors v. United StatesPostal Serv., No. C77-2188 (N.D. Cal. July 12,1978), aff'd, No. 78-3245 (9th Cir. Feb. 27, 1980)(unpublished memorandum), 618 F.2d 116 (9th Cir.1980) (table cite).
3102 (b)(6) Nat'l Ass'n of Retired Fed. Employees v. Horner, 633F. Supp. 1241 (D.D.C. 1986), rev'd, 879 F.2d 873(D.C. Cir. 1989), reh'g en banc denied sub nom.Nat'l Ass'n of Retired Fed. Employees v. Newman,No. 86-5446 (D.C. Cir. Sept. 13, 1989), cert. de-nied, 494 U.S. 1078 (1990).
3103 Mootness NBC v. Dep't of the Air Force, No. 84-1048 (D.D.C. July 18, 1984).
- 219 -
3104 (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(9), attorney-client privilege, deliberative proc-ess
NBC v. SBA, 836 F. Supp. 121 (S.D.N.Y. 1993).
3105 (b)(4), (b)(5), adequacy of re-quest, summary judgment
Nat'l Cable Television Ass'n v. FCC, 479 F.2d 183(D.C. Cir. 1973).
3106 (b)(1), E.O. 12065, (b)(7)(D),assurance of confidentiality, be-lated classification, in camera in-spection
Nat'l Catholic Reporter Publ'g Co. v. FBI, No. 80-0585 (D.D.C. May 20, 1980), on motion for sum-mary judgment, 514 F. Supp. 1149 (D.D.C. 1981),on motion for reconsideration (D.D.C. June 17,1981).
3107 (b)(1), (b)(3), 50 U.S.C.§403(d)(3), §403g
Nat'l Comm'n on Law Enforcement & Soc. Justice v.CIA, No. 75-3644 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 20, 1976), aff'd,576 F.2d 1373 (9th Cir. 1978).
3108 (a)(1), publication Nat'l Conservative Political Action Comm. v. Fed.Election Comm'n, No. 78-0270 (D.D.C. Apr. 28,1978), aff'd as modified, 626 F.2d 953 (D.C. Cir.1980).
3109 Fees, fee waiver Nat'l Consumers Cong. v. AID, No. 75-1209 (D.D.C. Sept. 15, 1976).
3110 (b)(5) Nat'l Courier Ass'n v. Bd. of Governors of the Fed.Reserve Sys., 516 F.2d 1229 (D.C. Cir. 1975).
3111 Exceptional circumstances/due dil-igence
Nat'l Enquirer v. DOJ, No. 76-1071 (D.D.C. Nov. 1,1976).
3112 (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C) NLRB v. Biophysics Sys., 91 L.R.R.M. 3079 (S.D.N.Y. 1976).
3113 (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D),injunction of agency proceedingpending resolution of FOIA claim
NLRB v. Hardeman Garment Corp., 406 F. Supp.510 (W.D. Tenn. 1976), on motion to stay agencyproceedings, 91 L.R.R.M. 2425 (W.D. Tenn. 1976),rev'd, 557 F.2d 559 (6th Cir. 1977).
3114 (b)(5) Nat'l Nutritional Foods Ass'n v. Mathews, 418 F.Supp. 394 (S.D.N.Y. 1976).
3115 (b)(2), (b)(5), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E), (b)(7)(F),deliberative process
Nat'l Org. for the Reform of Marihuana Laws v.DEA, No. 80-1339 (D.D.C. June 24, 1981).
3116 Reverse FOIA, (b)(3), 18 U.S.C.§1905, (b)(4), de novo review, dis-cretionary release
NOW v. Soc. Sec. Admin., 736 F.2d 727 (D.C. Cir.1984).
3117 (b)(3), 18 U.S.C. §1905, (b)(4),(b)(6), burden of proof
Nat'l Parks & Conservation Ass'n v. Morton, 351 F.Supp. 404 (D.D.C. 1972), rev'd & remanded, 498F.2d 765 (D.C. Cir. 1974), on remand, No. 72-0436(D.D.C. Oct. 23, 1975), aff'd in part, rev'd in partsub nom. Nat'l Parks & Conservation Ass'n v. Klep-pe, 547 F.2d 673 (D.C. Cir. 1976).
3118 (b)(6), attorney's fees, duty tosearch
Nat'l Pizza Co. v. INS, No. 94-2972 (W.D. Tenn.Aug. 29, 1995).
- 220 -
3119 FOIA as a discovery tool Nat'l Presto Indus. v. United States, No. 76-301 (Ct.Cl. Oct. 26, 1978).
3120 (a)(2) Nat'l Prison Project v. Bureau of Prisons, No. 78-0216 (D.D.C. Jan. 26, 1979).
3121 (a)(2)(A), (b)(6) Nat'l Prison Project of the ACLU Found. v. Sigler,390 F. Supp. 789 (D.D.C. 1975).
3122 (b)(5), (b)(7)(A), deliberativeprocess
Nat'l Pub. Radio v. Bell, 431 F. Supp. 509 (D.D.C.1977).
3123 (b)(5) Nat'l Res. Def. Council v. NRC, No. 76-0592 (D.D.C. Apr. 14, 1977).
3124 (b)(1), E.O. 12958, (b)(3), 50U.S.C. §403-3(c)(6), waiver ofexemption
Nat'l Sec. Archive v. CIA, No. 99-1160 (D.D.C.July 31, 2000), motion to amend denied (D.D.C.Feb. 26, 2001).
3125 Fees (commercial requesters), fees(educational requesters), fees (me-dia requesters), fees (Reform Act)
Nat'l Sec. Archive v. CIA, No. 88-0501 (D.D.C.Jan. 30, 1990).
3126 Agency records Nat'l Sec. Archive v. CIA, No. 88-0119 (D.D.C.July 26, 1988), summary affirmance granted, No. 88-5298 (D.C. Cir. Feb. 6, 1989).
3127 Fee waiver (Reform Act) Nat'l Sec. Archive v. Dep't of Commerce, No. 87-1581, 1987 WL 27208 (D.D.C. Nov. 25, 1987).
3128 Fees (commercial requesters), fees(educational requesters), fees (me-dia requesters), fees (Reform Act),fee waiver (Reform Act), summaryjudgment
Nat'l Sec. Archive v. DOD, No. 86-3454 (D.D.C.Sept. 30, 1987), summary judgment granted, 690 F.Supp. 17 (D.D.C. 1988), aff'd in part, rev'd in part,880 F.2d 1381 (D.C. Cir. 1989), reh'g en banc de-nied, No. 88-5217 (D.C. Cir. Sept. 26, 1989), cert.denied, 494 U.S. 1029 (1990).
3129 Agency records, FOIA/FACA in-terface
Nat'l Sec. Archive v. Executive Office of the Pres-ident, 688 F. Supp. 29 (D.D.C. 1988), aff'd sub nom.Nat'l Sec. Archive v. Archivist of the United States,909 F.2d 541 (D.C. Cir. 1990).
3130 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, (b)(3), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e), (b)(5), (b)(7)(A),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E),assurance of confidentiality, delib-erative process, discovery in FOIAlitigation, law enforcement amend-ments (1986), "mosaic," VaughnIndex
Nat'l Sec. Archive v. FBI, No. 88-1507 (D.D.C.June 7, 1990), partial summary judgment granted,759 F. Supp. 872 (D.D.C. 1991), summary judgmentgranted, 1993 WL 128499 (D.D.C. Apr. 14, 1993).
3131 E.O. 12356, adequacy of agencyaffidavit
Nat'l Sec. Archive v. Office of Indep. Counsel, No.89-2308, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13146 (D.D.C.Aug. 28, 1992).
3132 Attorney's fees Nat'l Senior Citizen Law Ctr. v. Soc. Sec. Admin.,849 F.2d 401 (9th Cir. 1988).
3133 Discovery/FOIA interface Nat'l Small Shipments Traffic Conference v. ICC,No. 82-2895 (D.D.C. Dec. 16, 1982).
- 221 -
3134 Injunction of agency proceedingpending resolution of FOIA claim
Nat'l Steel Prods. Co. v. NLRB, No. C78-293 (N.D.Ga. Oct. 16, 1978).
3135 (b)(5), deliberative process, inter-or intra-agency memoranda
Nat'l Tank Truck Carriers, Inc. v. OMB, 3 GDS¶82,327 (D.D.C. 1982).
3136 (b)(6) Nat'l Treasury Employees Union v. ACTION, No.78-1431 (D.D.C. Jan. 20, 1979).
3137 (b)(6), FOIA as a discovery tool,reasonably segregable
Nat'l Treasury Employees Union v. Dep't of theTreasury, 3 GDS ¶83,224 (D.D.C. 1983).
3138 (a)(2)(C), (b)(2) Nat'l Treasury Employees Union v. Dep't of theTreasury, 487 F. Supp. 1321 (D.D.C. 1980).
3139 (b)(6) Nat'l Treasury Employees Union v. Dep't of theTreasury, No. 77-0465 (D.D.C. Aug. 29, 1978).
3140 (b)(6), summary judgment Nat'l Treasury Employees Union v. FDIC, No. 86-2537 (D.D.C. Nov. 25, 1987).
3141 Fees, fee waiver Nat'l Treasury Employees Union v. Griffin, No. 84-3291 (D.D.C. July 22, 1985), aff'd, 811 F.2d 644(D.C. Cir. 1987).
3142 Res judicata Nat'l Treasury Employees Union v. IRS, 765 F.2d1174 (D.C. Cir. 1985).
3143 (b)(3), 5 U.S.C. §7114(b)(4),§7132
Nat'l Treasury Employees Union v. OPM, No. 79-0695 (D.D.C. July 9, 1979).
3144 (b)(5), (b)(6) Nat'l Treasury Employees Union v. United States, 2GDS ¶81,146 (D.D.C. 1981).
3145 (b)(2), "mosaic," Vaughn Index Nat'l Treasury Employees Union v. United StatesCustoms Serv., 602 F. Supp. 469 (D.D.C. 1984),aff'd, 802 F.2d 525 (D.C. Cir. 1986).
3146 (b)(3), 5 U.S.C. §7114(b)(4), ex-ceptional circumstances/due dili-gence, exhaustion of administra-tive remedies
Nat'l Treasury Employees Union v. United StatesCustoms Serv., 2 GDS ¶82,191 (D.D.C. 1982).
3147 Attorney's fees Nat'l Veterans Legal Servs. Program v. VA, No. 96-1740 (D.D.C. July 2, 1997) (magistrate's recommen-dation), adopted in large part (D.D.C. Oct. 29,1997), additional attorney's fees awarded (D.D.C.Oct. 8, 1998) (magistrate's recommendation), a-dopted (D.D.C. Apr. 13, 1999).
3148 (b)(3), 39 U.S.C. §410(c)(2),(b)(4), (b)(6), attorney's fees,proper party defendant
Nat'l W. Life Ins. Co. v. United States, 512 F. Supp.454 (N.D. Tex. 1980).
- 222 -
3149 Attorney's fees, case or controver-sy, fee waiver, mootness
Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n v. Dep't of the Interior, 616 F.Supp. 889 (D.D.C. 1984), remanded, 780 F.2d 86(D.C. Cir. 1986) (consolidated), motion to consoli-date on remand denied, No. 83-3586 (D.D.C. Apr.8, 1986), dismissed as moot (D.D.C. Oct. 15, 1987),attorney's fees granted (D.D.C. Oct. 15, 1987), ad-ditional attorney's fees denied (D.D.C. Aug. 19,1988).
3150 Fee waiver (Reform Act), sum-mary judgment
Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n v. Hamilton, No. 95-017 (D.Mont. July 16, 1996).
3151 (b)(5), deliberative process Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n v. United States Forest Serv.,861 F.2d 1114 (9th Cir. 1988).
3152 (b)(5), deliberative process, sum-mary judgment
Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n v. United States Forest Serv.,No. 86-1255 (D.D.C. Sept. 26, 1987).
3153 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, agency, FOIA/FACA interface, summary judg-ment
Nation Co. v. Archivist of the United States, No.88-1939 (D.D.C. July 24, 1990).
3154 (b)(6), (b)(7)(C), duty to search,expedited processing, preliminaryinjunction
Nation Magazine v. Dep't of State, 805 F. Supp. 68(D.D.C. 1992), summary judgment granted in part,No. 92-2303 (D.D.C. Aug. 18, 1995).
3155 (b)(7)(C), duty to search, "Glo-mar" denial, personal records, sum-mary judgment
Nation Magazine v. United States Customs Serv.,No. 94-0808 (D.D.C. July 29, 1994), reconsidera-tion denied (D.D.C. Oct. 7, 1994), rev'd & remand-ed, 71 F.3d 885 (D.C. Cir. 1995), on remand, 937 F.Supp. 39 (D.D.C. 1996), renewed motion for sum-mary judgment denied (D.D.C. Feb. 14, 1997), re-newed motion for summary judgment granted (D.D.C. May 20, 1997).
3156 Attorney's fees Nationwide Bldg. Maint. v. Sampson, 559 F.2d 704(D.C. Cir. 1977).
3157 Reverse FOIA, (b)(3), 18 U.S.C.§1905, 42 U.S.C. §2000e, (b)(5),(b)(6), (b)(7), de novo review
Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. Friedman, 451 F. Supp.736 (D. Md. 1978).
3158 Expedited processing Natural Res. Def. Council v. DOE, 191 F. Supp. 2d41 (D.D.C. 2002).
3159 (b)(1), (b)(3), 50 U.S.C.§403(d)(3), (b)(5), Congressionalrecords
Navasky v. CIA, 499 F. Supp. 269 (S.D.N.Y. 1980),subsequent decision, 521 F. Supp. 128 (S.D.N.Y.1981), aff'd, 679 F.2d 873 (2d Cir. 1981), cert. de-nied, 459 U.S. 822 (1982).
3160 (b)(6), summary judgment Navigator Publ'g, L.L.C. v. Dep't of Transp., 146 F.Supp. 2d 68 (D. Me. 2001).
3161 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, (b)(3), 8U.S.C. §1202(f), 50 U.S.C.§403(d)(3), discovery in FOIAlitigation, duty to search, excep-tional circumstances/due diligence,expedited processing, reasonablysegregable, summary judgment
Nayed v. INS, No. 91-0805 (D.D.C. Nov. 29, 1993).
- 223 -
3162 Reverse FOIA, (b)(3), 18 U.S.C.§1905, (b)(4), preliminary injunc-tion
Neal-Cooper Grain Co. v. Kissinger, 385 F. Supp.769 (D.D.C. 1974).
3163 (b)(7)(A) Neb. Bulk Transp. v. NLRB, No. 78-L-5 (D. Neb.Jan. 24, 1978).
3164 Vaughn Index Neely v. CIA, 3 GDS ¶82,393 (D.D.C. 1982), aff'd,744 F.2d 878 (D.C. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 471U.S. 1022 (1985), reh'g denied, 472 U.S. 1013(1985).
3165 (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), adequacy ofagency affidavit, assurance of con-fidentiality, discovery in FOIA lit-igation, expedited processing, incamera inspection, waiver of ex-emption
Neely v. FBI, No. 97-0786 (W.D. Va. July 27,1998), motion for clarification granted (W.D. Va.Jan. 12, 1999), on in camera inspection (W.D. Va.Jan. 25, 1999), vacated & remanded, 208 F.3d 461(4th Cir. 2000), summary judgment granted (W.D.Va. Nov. 8, 2000).
3166 Duty to create a record, duty tosearch, exhaustion of administra-tive remedies, FOIA/PA interface,mootness, summary judgment
Neff v. IRS, No. 85-816 (S.D. Fla. Feb. 7, 1986)(magistrate's recommendation), summary judgmentgranted (S.D. Fla. Nov. 24, 1986), aff'd as modified,840 F.2d 23 (11th Cir. 1988), judgment on costs(S.D. Fla. Mar. 15, 1988).
3167 (a)(1)(D), publication Neighborhood Legal Servs. v. Legal Servs. Corp.,466 F. Supp. 1148 (D. Conn. 1979).
3168 (b)(2), (b)(5), (b)(7), (b)(7)(A),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E),assurance of confidentiality, attor-ney work-product privilege, delib-erative process, law enforcementamendments (1986), law enforce-ment purpose, summary judgment
Neill v. DOJ, No. 91-3319 (D.D.C. July 20, 1993),remanded, No. 93-5292 (D.C. Cir. Mar. 9, 1994),case dismissed (D.D.C. Jan. 31, 1996).
3169 (b)(1), E.O. 12356 Nelson v. DOJ, No. 1:90-1119 (N.D. Ga. Sept. 12,1990), aff'd, No. 90-8954 (11th Cir. Jan. 21, 1992)(unpublished memorandum), 953 F.2d 650 (11th
Cir. 1992) (table cite), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 915(1992).
3170 (b)(2), (b)(3), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E), (b)(7)(F),summary judgment, waiver of ex-emption
Nelson v. DOJ, No. 87-1833 (D.D.C. Mar. 25,1988).
3171 Privacy Act access, (b)(5), delib-erative process, FOIA/PA interface
Nelson v. EEOC, No. 83-C-983 (E.D. Wis. Feb. 14,1984).
3172 (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(D) Nemacolin Mines Corp. v. NLRB, 467 F. Supp. 521(W.D. Pa. 1979).
3173 Privacy Act access, (b)(4), (b)(6),(b)(7)(C), proper party defendant
Nemetz v. Dep't of the Treasury, 446 F. Supp. 102(N.D. Ill. 1978).
3174 Proper party defendant Nettleton v. Heye, No. 93-718 (D. Nev. Jan. 20,1995).
- 224 -
3175 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(b)(2) Netzman v. IRS, No. 3-95-248, 1995 U.S. Dist.LEXIS 20137 (D. Minn. Nov. 21, 1995).
3176 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(b)(2),(b)(5), attorney-client privilege,deliberative process, reasonablysegregable
Neufeld v. IRS, 1 GDS ¶79,118 (D.D.C. 1979), aff'din part, rev'd in part, 646 F.2d 661 (D.C. Cir. 1981).
3177 Duty to search Neugent v. Dep't of the Interior, No. 79-1229 (D.D.C. 1980), rev'd, 640 F.2d 386 (D.C. Cir. 1981).
3178 (b)(5), (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C), at-torney work-product privilege,deliberative process, law enforce-ment amendments (1986), rea-sonably segregable, summary judg-ment
Nevas v. DOJ, 789 F. Supp. 445 (D.D.C. 1992),motion to amend denied, Nos. 89-0042, 89-0043(D.D.C. July 9, 1992), vacated & remanded subnom. Mapother v. DOJ, 3 F.3d 1533 (D.C. Cir.1993).
3179 Dismissal for failure to prosecute Neville v. Dep't of Commerce, No. C1-83-718 (S.D.Ohio Oct. 24, 1983).
3180 Dismissal for failure to prosecute Neville v. DEA, No. C1-83-721 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 24,1983).
3181 (b)(5), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), as-surance of confidentiality, attor-ney's fees, deliberative process,FOIA as a discovery tool
New England Apple Council, Inc. v. Donovan, 560F. Supp. 231 (D. Mass. 1983), subsequent decision,No. 80-2925 (D. Mass. Apr. 7, 1983), rev'd, 725F.2d 139 (1st Cir. 1984), attorney's fees denied, 640F. Supp. 16 (D. Mass. 1985).
3182 (b)(7)(A) New England Med. Hosp. Ctr. v. NLRB, 548 F.2d377 (1st Cir. 1976).
3183 Adequacy of request, duty to dis-close
Newman v. Legal Servs. Corp., 628 F. Supp. 535 (D.D.C. 1986).
3184 (b)(5) N.M. ex rel. Reynolds v. Kleppe, No. 75-684 (D.N.M. Dec. 10, 1976), subsequent decision (D.N.M.Feb. 24, 1977).
3185 Attorney's fees Newport Aeronautical Sales v. Dep't of the Navy,No. 84-0120, 1985 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20679 (D.D.C.Apr. 17, 1985).
3186 (b)(2), (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6),commercial privilege
News Group Boston, Inc. v. Nat'l R.R. PassengerCorp., 799 F. Supp. 1264 (D. Mass. 1992), appealdismissed, No. 92-2250 (1st Cir. Dec. 4, 1992).
3187 Fee waiver Newsome v. FBI, 1 GDS ¶79,142 (M.D.N.C. 1979).
3188 Fee waiver, mootness Newton v. DOJ, 3 GDS ¶82,455 (D.D.C. 1982).
3189 (a)(1), (a)(1)(D), publication New York v. Lyng, 829 F.2d 346 (2d Cir. 1987).
3190 (b)(6) N.Y. Times Co. v. NASA, 679 F. Supp. 33 (D.D.C.1987), stay pending appeal granted, No. 86-2860(D.D.C. July 16, 1987), aff'd, 852 F.2d 602 (D.C.Cir. 1988), vacated & reh'g en banc ordered, 860F.2d 1093 (D.C. Cir. 1988), rev'd, 920 F.2d 1002(D.C. Cir. 1990) (en banc), summary judgmentgranted, 782 F. Supp. 628 (D.D.C. 1991).
- 225 -
3191 Proper party defendant Ng v. DOJ, No. 97-184 (C.D. Cal. June 2, 1997)(minute order).
3192 Jurisdiction Nguyen v. United States, No. 95-519A (E.D. Va.July 28, 1995).
3193 (a)(1), (a)(1)(D), publication Nguyen v. United States, 824 F.2d 697 (9th Cir.1987).
3194 (b)(4), summary judgment Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. v. DOE, No. 95-0952(D.D.C. Feb. 23, 1996), vacated & remanded, 169F.3d 16 (D.C. Cir. 1999).
3195 (b)(6), (b)(7)(C), attorney's fees,jurisdiction, no improper withhold-ing
Nicholau v. United States, 699 F. Supp. 1063 (S.D.N.Y. 1988).
3196 (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), VaughnIndex
Nicolaus v. FBI, No. C-95-3614 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 15,2000), aff'd, 24 Fed. Appx. 807 (9th Cir. 2001).
3197 Attorney's fees Nichols v. Landreau, 2 GDS ¶81,048 (D.D.C.1980).
3198 Attorney's fees Nichols v. Pierce, 740 F.2d 1249 (D.C. Cir. 1984).
3199 (b)(3), 44 U.S.C. §2107,§2108(c), agency records
Nichols v. United States, 325 F. Supp. 130 (D. Kan.1971), aff'd, 460 F.2d 671 (10th Cir. 1972), cert. de-nied, 409 U.S. 966 (1972).
3200 (a)(2)(A) Nicholson v. Brown, 599 F.2d 639 (5th Cir. 1979),modified on reh'g, 605 F.2d 209 (5th Cir. 1979).
3201 (b)(5), attorney work-productprivilege, deliberative process,reasonably segregable
Nickerson v. United States, No. 95 C 7395, 1996WL 563465 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 1, 1996).
3202 (a)(2)(A), (b)(5), attorney work-product privilege
Niemeir v. Watergate Special Prosecution Force,420 F. Supp. 794 (N.D. Ill. 1976), rev'd & remand-ed, 565 F.2d 967 (7th Cir. 1977).
3203 (a)(1)(D), publication NI Indus. v. United States, 841 F.2d 697 (9th Cir.1987).
3204 (b)(3), 18 U.S.C. §1905, (b)(4),(b)(5), deliberative process, incor-poration by reference
9 to 5 Org. for Women Office Workers v. Bd. ofGovernors of the Fed. Reserve Sys., 527 F. Supp.1163 (D. Mass. 1981), on motion for summaryjudgment, No. 80-2905 (D. Mass. Dec. 21, 1981),revised Vaughn Index ordered, 3 GDS ¶83,043 (D.Mass. 1982), subsequent decision, 547 F. Supp. 846(D. Mass. 1982), summary judgment granted, 551 F.Supp. 1006 (D. Mass. 1982), motion to amend de-nied, 551 F. Supp. 1010 (D. Mass. 1982), vacated &remanded, 721 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1983).
3205 Discovery in FOIA litigation, dutyto search
Niren v. INS, 103 F.R.D. 10 (D. Or. 1984).
- 226 -
3206 (b)(2), (b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(7),(b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D),assurance of confidentiality, attor-ney work-product privilege, delib-erative process, discovery in FOIAlitigation, in camera inspection,law enforcement amendments(1986), law enforcement purpose,reasonably segregable, summaryjudgment, Vaughn Index, waiverof exemption
Nishnic v. DOJ, No. 86-2802 (D.D.C. Mar. 16,1987), summary judgment granted in part, 671 F.Supp. 771 (D.D.C. 1987), summary judgmentgranted in part, 671 F. Supp. 776 (D.D.C. 1987),aff'd, 828 F.2d 844 (D.C. Cir. 1987), reconsiderationdenied, 1987 WL 19434 (D.D.C. Oct. 20, 1987).
3207 (b)(5), attorney work-productprivilege, deliberative process
Nissei Sangyo Am. v. IRS, No. 95-1019, 1998 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 2966 (D.D.C. Jan. 28, 1998).
3208 (b)(5), (b)(7)(A), attorney work-product privilege, waiver of ex-emption (administrative release)
Nissen Foods v. NLRB, 540 F. Supp. 584 (E.D. Pa.1982).
3209 (b)(2), (b)(6), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), agency, attorney's fees
Nix v. DOJ, No. 75-0935 (D.S.C. May 12, 1976),aff'd as modified & remanded sub nom. Nix v.United States, 572 F.2d 998 (4th Cir. 1978).
3210 (b)(1), (b)(3), 44 U.S.C. §2101,agency, agency records, attorney'sfees, case or controversy, mootness
Nixon v. Sampson, 389 F. Supp. 107 (D.D.C. 1975),order stayed sub nom. Nixon v. Richey, 513 F.2d427 (D.C. Cir. 1975), on reconsideration, 513 F.2d430 (D.C. Cir. 1975), dismissed as moot, 437 F.Supp. 654 (D.D.C. 1977), rev'd sub nom. ReportersComm. for Freedom of the Press v. Sampson, 591F.2d 944 (D.C. Cir. 1978), on remand, Nos. 74-1518, 74-1533, 74-1551 (D.D.C. June 12, 1980).
3211 (b)(2), (b)(3), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e),(b)(5), (b)(7), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(E), assurance ofconfidentiality, FOIA/PA inter-face, law enforcement amend-ments (1986), law enforcementpurpose, summary judgment, waiv-er of exemption
Nolan v. DOJ, No. 89-2035, 1991 WL 36547 (D.Colo. Mar. 18, 1991), summary judgment grantedon other grounds, 1991 WL 134803 (D. Colo. July17, 1991), aff'd on other grounds, 973 F.2d 843 (10th
Cir. 1992).
3212 Interaction of (a)(2) & (a)(3), ju-risdiction
Nolen v. Rumsfeld, 535 F.2d 890 (5th Cir. 1976),cert. denied, 429 U.S. 1104 (1977).
3213 Adequacy of request Noll v. IRS, No. 94-521 (D. Idaho Sept. 6, 1995).
3214 Adequacy of request Noll v. IRS, No. 93-0100 (D. Idaho Sept. 14, 1994)(magistrate's recommendation), adopted (D. IdahoOct. 12, 1994).
3215 Reverse FOIA, mootness Norman S. Fink Eng'g Co. v. Duncan, 2 GDS ¶82,007 (E.D. Wash. 1981).
3216 Attorney's fees Norris v. DOJ, No. 85-0421 (D.D.C. June 5, 1985),attorney's fees denied (D.D.C. July 16, 1985).
- 227 -
3217 (b)(2), (b)(5), (b)(7)(A), attorneywork-product privilege, delibera-tive process, discovery/FOIA in-terface, res judicata
North v. Walsh, No. 87-2700 (D.D.C. Apr. 29,1988), partial summary judgment granted (D.D.C.June 8, 1988), partial summary judgment granted(D.D.C. Aug. 31, 1988), rev'd & remanded, 881F.2d 1088 (D.C. Cir. 1989), on remand (D.D.C.June 25, 1991), on in camera inspection (D.D.C.July 26, 1991).
3218 (b)(7)(A), in camera affidavit N. Am. Man/Boy Love Ass'n v. FBI, 3 GDS ¶83,094(S.D.N.Y. 1982), aff'd, 718 F.2d 1086 (2d Cir.1983).
3219 (a)(1) N. Am. Van Lines v. United States, 412 F. Supp.782 (N.D. Ind. 1976).
3220 (b)(3), 18 U.S.C. §1905, (b)(4),summary judgment, waiver of ex-emption
N.C. Network for Animals v. USDA, No. 89-630-5(E.D.N.C. Dec. 21, 1989), vacated & remanded,No. 90-1443 (4th Cir. Feb. 5, 1991) (unpublishedmemorandum), 924 F.2d 1052 (4th Cir. 1991) (tablecite).
3221 (b)(5), discretionary release, waiv-er of exemption
North Dakota ex rel. Olson v. Dep't of the Interior,No. 77-1041 (D.N.D. Dec. 7, 1977), rev'd & re-manded, 581 F.2d 177 (8th Cir. 1978).
3222 (b)(5), deliberative process, incor-poration by reference, reasonablysegregable, summary judgment
N. Dartmouth Props., Inc. v. HUD, 984 F. Supp. 65(D. Mass. 1997).
3223 (a)(1)(B), (a)(1)(C) N. Cal. Power Agency v. Morton, 396 F. Supp. 1187(D.D.C. 1975), aff'd sub nom. N. Cal. Power Agencyv. Kleppe, 539 F.2d 243 (D.C. Cir. 1976).
3224 Reverse FOIA, (b)(3), 18 U.S.C.§1905, nexus test
N. Television, Inc. v. FCC, 1 GDS ¶80,124 (D.D.C.1980).
3225 Reverse FOIA, (b)(3), 18 U.S.C.§1905, (b)(4)
N. Fla. Reg'l Hosp., Inc. v. Mutual of Omaha Ins.Co., No. C77-1808 (N.D. Ga. Dec. 22, 1977).
3226 (b)(3), 7 U.S.C. §136h(d), (b)(4),attorney's fees
Nw. Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides v.Browner, 941 F. Supp. 197 (D.D.C. 1996), on mo-tion for attorney's fees, 965 F. Supp. 59 (D.D.C.1997).
3227 Attorney's fees Nw. Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides v. Reilly,No. 90-0707 (D.D.C. May 26, 1992).
3228 (b)(5), deliberative process, sum-mary judgment, waiver of exemp-tion
Nw. Envtl. Def. Ctr. v. United States Forest Serv.,No. 91-125 (D. Or. Aug. 23, 1991) (magistrate'srecommendation), subsequent order (D. Or. Dec. 3,1991) (magistrate's recommendation), adopted (D.Or. Feb. 12, 1992).
- 228 -
3229 (b)(5), (b)(6), adequacy of re-quest, attorney-client privilege,attorney's fees, attorney work-product privilege, deliberativeprocess, disciplinary proceedings,in camera inspection, settlementdocuments, stay pending appeal,waiver of exemption
Norwood v. FAA, 580 F. Supp. 994 (W.D. Tenn.1983), summary judgment granted in part, No. 83-2315 (W.D. Tenn. Dec. 11, 1991), reconsiderationdenied (W.D. Tenn. June 16, 1992), stay granted,No. 92-5820 (6th Cir. July 2, 1992), aff'd in part,rev'd in part, 993 F.2d 570 (6th Cir. 1993).
3230 (a)(1)(D), publication Notaro v. Luther, 800 F.2d 290 (2d Cir. 1986).
3231 (b)(3), 15 U.S.C. §57b-2(f),(b)(5), discretionary release,Vaughn Index, waiver of exemp-tion
Novo Labs. v. FTC, 1 GDS ¶80,216 (D.D.C. 1980),on motion for summary judgment, 2 GDS ¶81,320(D.D.C. 1981).
3232 (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103(b)(2),(b)(5), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(E), at-torney-client privilege, exhaustionof administrative remedies, in cam-era inspection
Novotny v. IRS, No. 94-549, 1994 WL 722686 (D.Colo. Sept. 8, 1994).
3233 (b)(7)(E), duty to search, in cam-era inspection, summary judgment,waiver of exemption
Nowak v. IRS, No. 97-930 H, 1998 U.S. Dist.LEXIS 12461 (S.D. Cal. July 20, 1998), aff'd, No.98-56656, 2000 WL 60067 (9th Cir. Jan. 18, 2000)(unpublished memorandum), 210 F.3d 384 (9th Cir.2000) (table cite).
3234 Duty to search, summary judgment Nowak v. IRS, No. 96-744 (S.D. Cal. Apr. 4, 1997),aff'd, No. 97-55678, 1998 WL 196679 (9th Cir. Apr.22, 1998) (unpublished memorandum), 142 F.3d444 (9th Cir. 1998) (table cite).
3235 (b)(1), E.O. 12065, attorney's fees,"Glomar" denial
Nuclear Control Inst. v. NRC, 563 F. Supp. 768 (D.D.C. 1983), attorney's fees denied, 595 F. Supp. 923(D.D.C. 1984).
3236 Attorney's fees Nuclear Pac. v. Dep't of Commerce, No. C83-1761(W.D. Wash. July 18, 1984).
3237 (b)(2), (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D), (b)(7)(F), FOIA/PAinterface, Vaughn Index
Nunez v. DEA, 497 F. Supp. 209 (S.D.N.Y. 1980).
3238 Dismissal for failure to prosecute Nuzzo v. FBI, No. 95-1708, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS15594 (D.D.C. Oct. 8, 1996), subsequent order (D.D.C. Mar. 5, 1997).
3239 (a)(1), (a)(2), publication Oahe Conservancy Sub-Dist. v. Alexander, 493 F.Supp. 1294 (D.S.D. 1980).
3240 (a)(1)(C), publication Oakes v. IRS, No. 86-2804, 1987 WL 10227 (D.D.C. Apr. 16, 1987).
3241 Vaughn Index Oakland Tribune v. SBA, No. C89-2997 (N.D. Cal.Dec. 6, 1989).
3242 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, (b)(7)(C),(b)(7)(D)
Oatle v. United States, No. 82-0991 (D.D.C. Oct.14, 1983).
- 229 -
3243 Privacy Act access, (b)(2), in cam-era inspection
Oatley v. United States, 3 GDS ¶83,274 (D.D.C.1983).
3244 (b)(6), duty to create a record Oberholtzer v. United States Postal Serv., No. 86-3049 (D. Md. June 29, 1987).
3245 (b)(5), deliberative process, rea-sonably segregable
O'Brien v. Dep't of the Treasury, No. 83-0092 (D.D.C. Oct. 14, 1983).
3246 Agency O'Bryan v. Bowman, No. 91-16037 (9th Cir. Dec. 31,1992) (unpublished memorandum), 983 F.2d 1077(9th Cir. 1992) (table cite).
3247 Reverse FOIA, (b)(4), jurisdiction Occidental Petroleum Corp. v. SEC, 662 F. Supp.496 (D.D.C. 1987), aff'd, 873 F.2d 325 (D.C. Cir.1989).
3248 Pro se litigant Ochs v. DOJ, No. 84-1970 (D.D.C. Nov. 16, 1984).
3249 (b)(2), (b)(3), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), assurance ofconfidentiality, proper party de-fendant
Ochs v. FBI, 2 GDS ¶81,252 (D.D.C. 1981), aff'd,679 F.2d 262 (D.C. Cir. 1982).
3250 (b)(2), (b)(3), 26 U.S.C. §6103,(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(E), law enforce-ment amendments (1986), sum-mary judgment
O'Connor v. IRS, 698 F. Supp. 204 (D. Nev. 1988),aff'd sub nom. O'Connor v. United States, No. 89-15321 (9th Cir. June 4, 1991) (unpublished memo-randum), 935 F.2d 275 (9th Cir. 1991) (table cite),cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1104 (1992).
3251 (b)(5), (b)(7)(A), agency records,attorney work-product privilege,deliberative process
O'Donnell v. DOJ, 1 GDS ¶80,058 (D.D.C. 1980).
3252 (b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(7)(C), attorneywork-product privilege, delibera-tive process
Office of the Capital Collateral Counsel v. DOJ, No.8:00-1793 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 1, 2002).
3253 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies
Offord v. Egger, No. 5-85-0060 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 18,1985).
3254 (b)(1), E.O. 12356, (b)(3), 50U.S.C. §403(d)(3), §403g, (b)(7),(b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), duty tosearch, exhaustion of administra-tive remedies, fee waiver (ReformAct), interaction of (a)(2) &(a)(3), law enforcement amend-ments (1986), law enforcementpurpose, no improper withhhold-ing, Vaughn Index
Oglesby v. Dep't of the Army, No. 87-3349 (D.D.C.May 22, 1989), vacated & remanded, 920 F.2d 57(D.C. Cir. 1990), summary judgment granted (D.D.C. Nov. 2, 1994), aff'd in part, rev'd & remandedin part, 79 F.3d 1172 (D.C. Cir. 1996).
3255 Dismissal for failure to prosecute,exceptional circumstances/due dil-igence, expedited processing
Ohaegbu v. FBI, 936 F. Supp. 7 (D.D.C. 1996), dis-missed for failure to prosecute, No. 96-5261 (D.C.Cir. Nov. 22, 1996).
3256 Attorney's fees, mootness O'Harvey v. IRS, No. 93-0384 (E.D. Wash. Apr. 5,1994).
- 230 -
3257 (b)(6), FOIA as a discovery tool,no record within scope of request,summary judgment
O'Harvey v. Office of Workers' Comp. on Programs,No. 95-0187 (E.D. Wash. Dec. 7, 1995), vacated &remanded, No. 96-35015, 1997 WL 31589 (9th Cir.Jan. 24, 1997) (unpublished memorandum), 106 F.d408 (9th Cir. 1997) (table cite), on remand (E.D.Wash. Dec. 29, 1997), aff'd sub nom. O'Harvey v.Comp. Programs Workers, No. 98-35106, 1999 WL626633 (9th Cir. Aug. 16, 1999) (unpublished mem-orandum), 188 F.3d 514 (9th Cir. 1999) (table cite).
3258 (b)(4), summary judgment Ohr v. United States, No. 87-0674 (S.D. Miss. Jan.25, 1989).
3259 Attorney's fees Oil, Chem. & Atomic Workers Int'l Union v. DOE,141 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2001).
3260 (b)(7)(C), summary judgment O'Kane v. United States Customs Serv., No. 95-0683 (S.D. Fla. Nov. 5, 1997), aff'd, 169 F.3d 1308(11th Cir. 1999).
3261 (b)(7)(A), exhaustion of adminis-trative remedies, proper party de-fendant
OKC Corp. v. Williams, 461 F. Supp. 540 (N.D.Tex. 1978), aff'd, 614 F.2d 58 (5th Cir. 1980), partialsummary judgment granted, 489 F. Supp. 576 (N.D.Tex. 1980), reh'g denied, 617 F.2d 1207 (5th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 952 (1980).
3262 Exhaustion of administrative rem-edies
Okken v. HHS, No. C-86-0065 (N.D. Iowa Sept.30, 1986), reconsideration denied (N.D. Iowa Dec.12, 1986).
3263 (b)(3), Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e), (b)(6),(b)(7), attorney's fees, law enforce-ment purpose, waiver of exemption(failure to assert in litigation)
Okla. Publ'g Co. v. HUD, No. 87-1935, 1988 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 18643 (W.D. Okla. June 17, 1988).
3264 Attorney's fees, duty to search Okon v. IRS, No. 91-660 (D.N.M. Jan. 12, 1995),attorney's fees denied (D.N.M. Jan. 24, 1995).
3265 Exceptional circumstances/due dil-igence
Okoronkwo v. Office of the United States Attorney,No. 93-2647 (D.D.C. Mar. 31, 1994).
3266 Privacy Act access, (b)(3), Fed.R.Crim.P. 32, agency records, pro selitigant, venue
Oldham v. United States, No. 86-0-42 (D. Neb.Nov. 25, 1986), subsequent order (D. Neb. May 4,1987), reconsideration denied (D. Neb. June 2,1987), on notice of appeal (D. Neb. June 9, 1987).
3267 (b)(5), deliberative process, waiverof exemption
Old Orchard Citizens Group v. HUD, 636 F. Supp.542 (N.D. Ohio 1986).
3268 (b)(7)(D), assurance of confidenti-ality
Oliva v. DOJ, 996 F.2d 1475 (2d Cir. 1993).
top related