UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA _________________________________________ : HARRIS BALLOW, : : Plaintiff, : : v. : Civil Action No. 20-0245 (ABJ) : U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, : : Defendant. : _________________________________________ : MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Harris Ballow filed this action under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”). See 5 U.S.C. § 552. The defendant has filed a Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 15), and the Court will grant the motion for the reasons discussed below. I. BACKGROUND A. Plaintiff’s Allegations of Fact Plaintiff, a federal prisoner currently designated to the United States Penitentiary in Terre Haute, Indiana, explains that he “was extradited from Mexico in April 2011, pursuant to a specific ‘Order of Extradition’” which “limited the offenses for which [he] could be detained, tried or punished upon his return to the United States.” Compl. (ECF No. 1) ¶ 3. He alleges that the U.S. Department of Justice “conspired . . . to violate [his] rights . . . by participating in [his] post[- ]extradition detention, trial, and punishment . . . for numerous offenses for which extradition was not granted by Mexico in 2011, damaging [him] in his business and property.” Id. In December 2019, plaintiff submitted a FOIA request to the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (“EOUSA”), a component of the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ” or 1 “defendant”). See id. ¶¶ 1-2. When plaintiff filed this lawsuit in January 2020, defendant had not yet responded, see id. ¶ 4, and plaintiff demanded defendant’s “full and immediate compliance with its statutory obligations under the FOIA[] and all responsive records be provided forthwith.” Id. at 2 (page number designated by CM/ECF). B. Defendant’s Assertions of Fact Defendant filed its summary judgment motion (ECF No. 15) on September 10, 2020. On September 14, 2020, the Court issued an Order (ECF No. 16) notifying plaintiff of his obligation to respond to the motion and advising him that the Court would accept as true the facts set forth in Defendant’s Statement of Material Facts (ECF No. 15-1, “SMF”) if he did not submit affidavits or documentary evidence to the contrary. Plaintiff has not filed an opposition or other response to defendant’s motion for summary judgment, and the Court will treat defendant’s asserted facts as admitted. See LCvR 7(h)(1). But in accordance with Circuit authority, the Court will go on to assess the motion on its merits rather than treating it as conceded. Defendant construed plaintiff’s FOIA request as one for records in the files of the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Texas (“USAO-SDTX”) regarding plaintiff’s extradition from Mexico “and any waiver [thereof].” SMF ¶ 4; see Finney Decl. (ECF No. 15-3), Ex. A (ECF No. 15-3 at 5). The EOUSA acknowledged receipt of plaintiff’s FOIA request by letter dated January 9, 2020. SMF ¶ 5. A search for responsive records began with PACER and CASEVIEW. See id. ¶ 6. “PACER is the federal courts’ electronic computer base filing system,” id. ¶ 7, …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals