- 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 & Trademark Office, 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, Vaughn Index 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 (5 th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1004 (1990). 2459 (b)(2), (b)(4), (b)(5), attorney- client privilege, attorney work- product privilege, deliberative process 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), exceptional circumstances/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, in camera 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 for in 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).
59
Embed
2450 Exhaustion of administrative rem- Klein v. Civiletti ...2450 Exhaustion of administrative rem- Klein v. Civiletti ... ... edies
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
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).
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).
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).
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
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).
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).
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).
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
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
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).
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
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).
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)
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)
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).
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).
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).
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).
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
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)
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
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).
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).
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
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).
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).
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
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).
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).
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).
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).
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).
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
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).
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 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).
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).
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
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).
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).
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).
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).
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).
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).