UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA _________________________________________ ) ARANDER M. HUGHES, JR., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) Case No. 19-cv-03278 (APM) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT ) OF JUSTICE et al., ) ) Defendants. ) _________________________________________ ) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER I. Pro se Plaintiff Arander M. Hughes, Jr. (“Plaintiff”) brings this action against Defendants United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and the United States of America (collectively, “Defendants”) under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) and the Privacy Act. See 5 U.S.C. § 552; Compl., ECF No. 1 [hereinafter Compl.]. This matter is before the court on Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 36 [hereinafter Defs.’ Mot.], and Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings or, in the alternative, for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 22 [hereinafter Pl.’s Mot.]. For the reasons that follow, both Defendants’ and Plaintiff’s Motions are granted in part and denied in part. II. This case arises from a FOIA request Plaintiff submitted to the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (“EOUSA”), a component of the DOJ, for records regarding himself. Compl. ¶ 8. On March 1, 2019, Plaintiff submitted his full name, nickname, date of birth, and social security number to EOUSA seeking “all documents and electronic media assembled by the United States Attorney’s Office for the Western District of North Carolina [“USAO-WDNC”] containing the name Arander Matthew Hughes, Jr.” Defs.’ Mot., Ex. A, ECF No. 36-3 [hereinafter Griffin Decl.], ¶ 5; Griffin Decl., Attach. 1. After Plaintiff did not receive any documents, Compl. ¶¶ 11– 12, he filed an appeal with DOJ’s Office of Information Policy, which rejected his appeal on the ground that “no adverse determination had been made,” id. ¶ 15. Plaintiff then filed the instant suit on October 21, 2019. Id. at 1. On December 23, 2019, EOUSA sent Plaintiff records for the first time totaling 220 pages, 67 of which contained redactions. Defs.’ Mot., Defs.’ Statement of Material Facts Not in Genuine Dispute, ECF No. 36-1 [hereinafter Defs.’ Facts], ¶ 8. EOUSA withheld 77 pages in full. Id. Plaintiff then filed a Status Report challenging EOUSA’s decision to withhold a draft plea agreement. Id. ¶ 9; Pl.’s Status Report, ECF No. 19, at 1–2. In July 2020, EOUSA re-reviewed the draft plea agreement and released it to Plaintiff. Defs.’ Facts ¶ 10; Griffin Decl. ¶ 21; Griffin Decl., Attach. 7. Plaintiff then filed a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings or, in the alternative, for Summary Judgment. See Pl.’s Mot. EOUSA then made two more supplemental releases of previously withheld records in May and June 2021. Defs.’ Facts ¶ 11. Defendants moved for summary judgment on June 24, 2021. See Defs.’ Mot. As part of its search, EOUSA determined that 255 pages of records had to be referred for review by another agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”). Griffin Decl. ¶ 18. The FBI released 35 pages in full and 168 pages in part and withheld 52 pages in full. Defs.’ Mot., ECF No. …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals