Case law

Thompson v. House, Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 29, 2011

the parts of the record relied upon by the plaintiffs do not establish the absence of a genuine dispute. … To see if she qualifies. Q. Okay. And what makes her qualified or not? A. Beauty. Q. Okay. So someone has to be good-looking to work for you? A. Most definitely.

Navajo Nation v. Azar II

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 27, 2018

Qualified organizations can receive grants for up to 80% of Head Start program costs. 42 U.S.C. § 9835(b). … § 1304.1(b), and HHS has not used less formal measures to establish appeal and hearing procedures for reductions based on chronic under-enrollment.

Kone Inc v. Chenega Worldwide Support, LLC

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 3, 2021

“If there are no genuine issues of material fact, the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law if the nonmoving party ‘fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an apply … This structural separation suggests that the parties did not intend for both clauses to be limited by the same qualifying language. Compare Arnold v.

Coleman v. Lappin

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 18, 2009

The “information need not actually be ‘rules and practices’ to qualify under [E]xemption 2, as the statute provides that matter ‘related’ to rules and practices is also exempt.” Schwaner v. … Exemption 6 protects from disclosure “personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6).

Djenasevic v. Executive Office for the United States Attorney

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 14, 2018

If privacy interests are identified, the burden shifts to the FOIA requestor to “establish a sufficient reason for the disclosure. … Confidentiality can be established expressly or impliedly.

Center for Auto Safety, Inc. v. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

342 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2004

Although some safety risks clearly warrant nationwide recalls due to the nature of the risk, see United States v. Gen. … The language of the 1998 letter clearly preserves this discretion.

In Re Guantanamo Bay Detainee Litigation

577 F. Supp. 2d 143 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 25, 2010

G, a request for release clearly stating the classified information they seek to release. … The outside of the envelope or mailer shall be clearly labeled “Attorney-Detainee Meeting Documents-For Classification Review By Privilege Team.”

Hopkins v. Price Waterhouse

737 F. Supp. 1202 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 25, 1990

The burden of proof rests squarely on Price Waterhouse to establish that it would have placed Ms. … While evidence regarding partnership benefits were clearly part of Ms.

Maqaleh v. Rumsfeld

899 F. Supp. 2d 10 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 19, 2012

Most importantly for present purposes, that result would be clearly at odds with the D.C. Circuit's conclusions. … delving deeply into highly confidential government documents involving "the conduct of foreign relations [and] the war power," which "are so exclusively entrusted to the political branches of government as to be largely immune

Legal Technology Group, Inc. v. Mukerji

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 10, 2019

Additionally, a reasonable juror could find that HBR knew about the facts establishing that Akin qualified as a client or prospect under Mukerji’s Employment Agreement, and thus, for purposes of eSentio’s tortious interference … to perform the work, or even the only vendor qualified to perform the work.

Archibald v. United States Department of Justice

950 F. Supp. 2d 80 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 17, 2013

(noting and finding significant the absence of the adverb “clearly” from, and the addition of the phrase “could reasonably be expected” to, Exemption 7(C)). … While “not every background check automatically qualifies” as having a law enforcement purpose, Doe, 790 F. Supp. at 20, background checks by nature implicate law enforcement interests, see Mittleman v.

Brown v. Hill

174 F. Supp. 3d 66 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 28, 2016

Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the district court is directed to allow [the plaintiff] to amend his complaint to clearly state the jurisdictional basis for this action and … Cir. 2003) (“All that is being established at this stage is that there is some constitutional harm suffered by the plaintiff, not whether the municipality is liable for that harm.”).

Stolt-Nielsen Transportation Group Ltd. v. United States

480 F. Supp. 2d 166 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 28, 2007

As such, to qualify under Exemption (b)(2), information need not actually constitute “rules and practices,” but need only be “related” to rules and practices. Id. … As defendant correctly notes, this information is clearly personnel information, medical information, or information that can “be identified as applying to [a particular] individual,” Wash.

Williams v. United States

932 F. Supp. 357 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 22, 1996

Thus, in order to pursue his medical malpractice claim, the plaintiff must work within the confines of the FTCA, because otherwise the United States and its agencies are protected from tort claims by sovereign immunity. … “In order to establish jurisdiction under the [FTCA], a claimant must provide the *362 agency with notice of a claim, not substantiate it to the agency’s satisfaction.” Id. at 917 .

Aftergood v. National Reconnaissance Office

441 F. Supp. 2d 37 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 24, 2006

Thus, it has not met its FOIA burden under 5 U.S.C. § 552 (a)(4)(B) of “establishing the applicability of the claimed exemption,” Assassination Archives, 334 F.3d at 57 . IV. … Indeed, they contend "there are likely few NRO files that would not qualify as operational.” Am. Br. at 8 (emphasis in original).

Harjo v. Kleppe

420 F. Supp. 1110 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 2, 1976

Thus the question clearly arises under the laws of the United States. … establish such an intent, the Court may not supply one by judicial interpretation.

Bagwell v. U.S. Department of Education

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 26, 2016

To qualify for this exemption, it is necessary, 8 first, that the production of the requested materials would disclose either “techniques or procedures for law enforcement … Further, as set forth above, the Clery Act investigation qualifies as an ongoing law enforcement investigation pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552[b](7)(A).

United States v. Hicks

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 5, 2020

Circuit held that the definition of “controlled substance offense” under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2 “clearly excludes inchoate offenses.” United States v. Winstead, 890 F.3d at 1091. … Hicks’ plea negotiations, the commentary to Section 4B1.2 said that attempt was a qualifying offense. The Winstead case was pending in the D.C.

St. Paul Mercury Insurance v. Capitol Sprinkler Inspection, Inc.

573 F. Supp. 2d 152 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 2, 2008

A: No Q: Did you ask him for any information that would allow you to [assess] ... whether he was competent, qualified, trained in order to do this job? A: No. … Parham, has not been offered as an expert witness and has not been qualified to provide opinion testimony. While both he and Mr.

Infusino v. Devos

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 4, 2022

Prevailing Party To be entitled to fees under the EAJA, Plaintiffs must first establish that they are a “prevailing party.” 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A). The D.C. … HLC’s November 2017 letter stated, quite clearly, that the accrediting commission “considers five factors in determining whether to approve a requested Change of Control,” that it “is the applying institution’s burden .