Case law

Protect Democracy Project v. U.S. Office of Management and Budget

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 21, 2025

“The deliberative process privilege is a qualified privilege and can be overcome by a sufficient showing of need.” … As discussed above, Defendants’ removal of the Public Apportionments Database clearly violates the 2022 and 2023 Acts, and Defendants have no legal basis for failing to comply with the Acts.

Moeller v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 17, 2021

Thus, the Commission has not established that its search was adequate. … This, without more, cannot establish that the attorney-client privilege was properly invoked.

Inyangette v. Bowser

District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 7, 2026

State . . . or the District of Columbia [law]” deprives an individual of the “rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.” 42 U.S.C. § 1983. … Code § 1-102 (establishing the District as an entity that can “sue and be sued” as a “municipal corporation”).

Tindal v. McHugh

945 F. Supp. 2d 111 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 23, 2013

Any enlisted soldier “pending MMRB action and follow-on determinations may not re-enlist,” though “[i]f otherwise qualified, they may extend their current enlistment” in accordance with Army regulations. … Nor has the plaintiff established that the proffered evidence, in the context of the instant case, qualifies for any of the “narrow” exceptions permitting consideration of “extra-record evidence.”

Oliver v. Black Knight Asset Management, LLC

812 F. Supp. 2d 2 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 26, 2011

Hood, 327 U.S. 678, 682-83 (1946) (stating that a suit may be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction where “the alleged claim under the Constitution or federal statutes clearly appears to be immaterial and made solely for … While defendants conceded that “the plan at issue” is an ERISA qualified plan (see Defs.’ Mem. at 2; Defs.’

Government Accountability Project v. U.S. Department of Justice

852 F. Supp. 2d 14 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 29, 2012

The letter plainly stated that “[b]oth the envelope and the letter should be clearly marked with the legend ‘FOIA Appeal.’” Id. … March 8, 2006) (“Although the government’s declarants here did not physically perform the searches for responsive records, they satisfy the requirement of personal knowledge and qualify as competent witnesses concerning

Elam v. Rooftopdc LLC

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 16, 2020

Price alleged that he and another African-American employee, Christopher Wright, were fired and replaced by a less-qualified non-African American, Juan Cruz. Id., ¶¶ 20, 37–44, 73. Mr. … Elam alleged that he was similarly replaced by a non-African American who was less qualified. Id., ¶ 105.

Electronic Privacy Information Center v. Internal Revenue Service

261 F. Supp. 3d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 18, 2017

Feb. 21, 2017) Critically, the remedies that EPIC seeks here in response to the IRS’s closing of its FOIA requests qualify as relief under FOIA. … This is because the Service’s second argument clearly carries the day. The APA permits claims to “compel agency action unlawfully withheld or unreasonably delayed.” 5 U.S.C. § 706(1).

Aguirre v. Securities & Exchange Commission

671 F. Supp. 2d 113 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 2, 2009

(noting that defendant would need to establish the curative effect of any prior hearing). … The Report clearly contains plaintiffs name and describes him, his history at the SEC and details related to his termination.

Grant Medical Center v. Hargan

875 F.3d 701 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 17, 2017

In 2001, two Kentucky hospitals that fell short of the bed count needed to qualify for the DSH adjustment challenged CMS’ interpretation of section 412.105(b). See Clark Regional Medical Center v. … Cir. 1992), this ambiguity exists “only in the absence of statutory terms clearly directing the choice between retroactive and prospective application,” id. at 888 .

Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. Miski

889 F. Supp. 2d 144 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 6, 2012

The United States established diplomatic relations with Libya in approximately 1952 or 1953. 13. … Here, the term “Libyan Embassy” clearly conveys consular services as the term “Vision Center” conveyed the delivery of optical services and, moreover, does not require the imaginativeness needed to associate sun tanning

Shurtleff v. United States Environmental Protection Agency

991 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2013

Bush established for the purpose of developing a national energy policy. … The Plaintiff maintains that the EPA’s representations do not satisfy its burden of establishing that the records are properly withheld because the Agency has failed to establish that the communications were confidential

Russell v. District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 24, 2025

Whole Woman’s Health is even further afield because that case was about sovereign immunity and the narrow exception thereto under Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908). … However, the court went on to engage in a police power 19 Tennessee’s 1870 constitution expressly qualified the right to bear arms by recognizing the legislature’s power to regulate carry “to prevent

American Federation of Teachers, Afl-Cio v. Bullock

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 2009

On the other hand, the statute of repose is a substantive provision which may not be waived because the time limit expressly qualifies the right which the statute creates. 489 … Peters clearly holds that the notice requirement laid out in § 4-406(f) is a pre-requisite to bringing any claim against IFSB.

Muslim Advocates v. United States Department of Justice

833 F. Supp. 2d 92 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 10, 2011

“Under [the] public-domain doctrine, materials normally immunized from disclosure under FOIA lose their protective cloak once disclosed and preserved in a permanent public record.” Cottone v. … reprising its waiver argument, asserting that “the same facts supporting a finding of waiver at the very least call into question whether the information the FBI seeks to protect is sufficiently ‘unknown to the public’ to qualify

Walston v. United States Department of Defense

238 F. Supp. 3d 57 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 28, 2017

To qualify as exempt under Exemption 5, “a document must meet two conditions: its source must be a Government agency, and it must fall within the ambit of a privilege against discovery under judicial standards that would … Walston] bears the burden of establishing a legitimate public interest supporting disclosure which is in line with the core purpose of FOIA, to contribute to greater general understanding of agency practice and procedure

Olaniyi v. District of Columbia

876 F. Supp. 2d 39 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 11, 2012

By Memorandum Opinion and Order dated February 17, 2006, the Court granted dismissal of many of Olaniyi’s claims on qualified immunity grounds, but denied the federal defendants’ motion to dismiss with respect to Olaniyi … The District’s traffic regulations provide that “[i]dentification tags shall be maintained free from foreign materials and in a clearly legible condition,” D.C. Mun. Regs.

Smartflash, LLC v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 20, 2024

The agency bears the burden of establishing that a claimed exemption applies. Watkins L. & Advoc., PLLC v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 78 F.4th 436, 450 (D.C. Cir. 2023). … USPTO has further established that reasonably foreseeable harm would result from their disclosure. See Emuwa, 113 F.4th at 1015-16.

M.R. v. District of Columbia

841 F. Supp. 2d 262 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 30, 2012

The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit identified three requirements to qualify as a “prevailing party” in cases including those brought under the IDEA: (1) “a court-ordered change in the legal relationship … The facts in this case clearly demonstrate Plaintiffs are not entitled to attorney’s fees under the IDEA itself.

Pfeiffer v. Duncan

659 F. Supp. 2d 160 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 5, 2009

Section 1491(a)(2), however, clearly delineates the situations under which such relief “incident of and collateral to” a monetary judgment may be granted. … Dir., Office of Thrift Supervision, 967 F.2d 598, 608 (D.C.Cir.1992) (“[T]he [Tucker] Act has long been construed as waiving sovereign immunity only for claims seeking damages, and not for those seeking equitable relief (