RE: FIRST-PARTY REQUEST

• Document Type: FOIA
• Collection: FOIA Collection
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 0005567353
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: June 24, 2015
• Document Release Date: October 13, 2010
• Case Number: F-2010-00465
• Publication Date: June 10, 2009

(Urbina, J.)
ummaries of New Decisions -- May 2009 http://www.usdoj.gov/oip/foiapost/2009foiapostl3.htm
4. Carvajal v. DEA, No. 06-2265, 2009 WL 1619209 (D.D.C. June 10, 2009)
Re: First-party request
? Litigation considerations: Plaintiff has failed to oppose defendants' motion for
summary judgment, thus defendants' motion will be treated as conceded.
5. Carson v. U.S. Office of Special Counsel, No. 08-317, 2009 WL 1616763 (E.D.
Tenn. June 9, 2009) (Phillips, J.)
Re: Records pertaining to Hatch Act violations, prohibited personnel practices,
and other investigations conducted by defendant
? Adequacy of search: "[Defendant] has carried its burden of showing that it
conducted adequate searches reasonably calculated to uncover relevant
information in response to [plaintiffs] FOIA requests. [Defendant] has provided the
court a detailed description of the search methodology used to recover relevant
information, including a description of its automated case management system."
? Jurisdiction: The court lacks authority under the FOIA to order defendant to
create new documents that plaintiff believes defendant was required to create.
? Exemptions 2, 5, 6, & 7(C): Defendant has shown that its use of these
exemptions to withhold information was proper.
WEEK OF JUNE 22
Courts of Appeal
1. Lahr v. NTSB, No. 06-56717, 2009 WL 1740752 (9th Cir. June 22, 2009)
(Berzon, J.)
if [additional] documents-did-exl.st when the agencies- conducted their searches, the
failure to produce or identifyoppQn.-I-rn';nQ ments cannot by itself prove the
Re: Records related to explosion of TWA flight 800
? Adequacy of search: Though plaintiff claims that the documents released to
him prove that additional responsive documents exist, he "presents no persuasive
evidence ... that these records now exist and either evaded discovery during the
agencies' searches or were purposely and improperly withheld." Plaintiff also
"presents no evidence that would undermine the district court's conclusion" that
there was no bad faith on the government's part, and his "contentions are too
speculative _to suppo the conclusion ;, irhadequate -Even
searches inadequate:" RELEASE^ DATE:
11
17-Sep-2010