UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ____________________________________ ) ELWOOD J. COOPER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 99-2513 (RBW) ) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ) JUSTICE, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION The plaintiff, Elwood J. Cooper, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this action against the United States Department of Justice (the “Justice Department”), the United States Marshals Service (the “Marshals Service”), and the United States Department of the Treasury (the “Treasury Department”) under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552, seeking the release of “all records related to his arrest and prosecution.” Cooper v. Dep’t of Just., 890 F. Supp. 2d 55, 57–58 (D.D.C. 2012) (Walton, J.). On March 14, 2016, following multiple decisions by the undersigned and other members of this Court and multiple remands by the District of Columbia Circuit over the twenty-plus-year duration of this case, the Court granted summary judgment to the defendants on what it understood to be “[t]he only remaining issue for the Court to resolve in this case[:] the propriety of the redactions made to the additional documents produced to the plaintiff in September 2005.” Cooper v. U.S. Dep’t of Just., 169 F. Supp. 3d 20, 32 (D.D.C. 2016) (Walton, J.) (“Cooper 2016”). In response to the Court’s ruling, the plaintiff appealed, see Notice of Appeal at 1, ECF No. 146, and the Circuit subsequently remanded the case to this Court for consideration of what it concluded were further “unresolved issues in this case[,]” namely, (1) “the withholdings in records produced to [the plaintiff] prior to [his] second appeal” and (2) “whether the agencies other than the [Marshals Service] conducted adequate searches for responsive records[,]” Order at 1–2, Cooper v. U.S. Dep’t of Just., No. 17-5219 (D.C. Cir. July 11, 2018) (“Cooper III”). In addition to the issues remanded by the Circuit, regarding which both parties have moved for summary judgment, see Defendants’ Consolidated Brief (“Defs.’ Br.”) at 14, ECF No. 154; Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Motion to the Court to Take Judicial Notice of the Record (“Pl.’s Apr. 4, 2019 Mot. for Judicial Notice”) at 4, ECF Nos. 160 & 169; 1 also pending before the Court are two motions filed by the plaintiff following the Circuit’s remand: (1) the plaintiff’s motion for judicial notice, see Pl.’s Apr. 4, 2019 Mot. for Judicial Notice, and (2) the plaintiff’s motion for discovery, see Plaintiff’s Motion to Proffer Interr[o]gatories and Request for Admission and Production of Documents in Respon[s]e to Defendants’ Opposition to His Motion to Take Judicial Notice and Notices to the Court and the Defendants Out of Time (“Pl.’s Aug. 16, 2021 Mot. for Discovery”) at 1, ECF No. 174. Upon consideration of the parties’ submissions and the entire record in this case, 2 the Court concludes 1 Although titled a motion for judicial notice, the plaintiff’s motion for judicial notice does not appear to seek judicial notice of the attached records, but rather primarily sets forth …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals