Case law

Bagwell v. U.S. Department of Justice

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 1, 2022

And that is likely for good reason; DOJ’s rule 14 would eviscerate the well-established, carefully drawn limits on the invocation of grand jury secrecy under Exemption … That email’s discussion of grand jury disclosures qualifies for the deliberative-process and work-product privileges. See Part III.B.1, supra.

Lamb v. Millennium Challenge Corporation

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 27, 2021

Jd. at 9, And, they argue that Plaintiff “fail[s] to allege or even identify a common law tort. . . for which the FTCA has waived the United States’ sovereign immunity.” … The key difference between the Social Security Act and the FTCA is that only the latter clearly prohibits the Court from hearing a case before the plaintiff has exhausted administrative 2 In relevant part, 42 U.S.C.

Sara Lee Corporation v. American Bakers Association Retirement Plan

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 1, 2009

Government that administers the pension plan insurance program established by Title IV of ERISA. 29 U.S.C. §§ 1301-1371. … Although its 2006 Letter clearly concedes that the Plan’s foundational documents present the Plan as an aggregate of separate plans, AR 1570, it was appropriate—probably even necessary—for PBGC to look beyond that language

Children's Hospital Association of Texas v. Price

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 6, 2018

Accordingly, the amendment created “payment adjustment[s]” for qualifying hospitals. See 42 U.S.C. § 1396r-4(c). … Whether plaintiffs may supplement the record in order to establish standing is a closer question. See, e.g., Amfac Resorts, L.L.C. v. U.S. Dep’t of the Interior, 282 F.3d 818, 830 (D.C.

American Immigration Lawyers Association v. United States Department of Homeland Security

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 2, 2020

For each category, the Fourth Howard Declaration explains the type of information withheld and why that information qualifies for protection under 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(E). … The next issue is whether the content of the documents and withheld information qualifies for protection under Exemption 7(E). To do so, it must meet two criteria.

Shekoyan v. Sibley International Corp.

217 F. Supp. 2d 59 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 16, 2002

has failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that he is a United States national. … To .establish the second element, the employee must in turn make two further showings.

Meshal v. Higgenbotham

47 F. Supp. 3d 115 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 13, 2014

Six Unknown Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 389 (1971); and (2) 10   Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. They also argue that Mr. … Meshal alleges that Defendants acted in accordance with guidelines established by the executive branch.

Stein v. Central Intelligence Agency

District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 14, 2020

The two exceptions are Stein’s claims (1) that OSD/JS improperly refused to process his request on the grounds that it was not properly submitted, and (2) that NBIB’s response to his briefing request did not qualify as … The Watters Declaration establishes that NBIB compiled the documents in question for a law enforcement purpose.

Abou-Haidar v. Sanin Vazquez

District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 9, 2019

Mozes is clearly an “anticipatory retention” case. … He did make efforts to qualify for medical practice in Uruguay but took no comparable steps in the United States.

CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND ETHICS v. Cheney

593 F. Supp. 2d 194 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 19, 2009

Id. at 1293 (“[t]he Armstrong I opinion does not stand for the unequivocal proposition that all decisions made pursuant to the PRA are immune from judicial review”). … Without such a showing, Plaintiffs cannot meet their burden of establishing standing against the EOP.

State of New Mexico v. Musk

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 23, 2026

And the APA’s limited waiver of sovereign immunity does not extend to orders “to enforce a contractual obligation to pay money.” Dep’t of Educ. v. … As discussed above, the alleged powers of the head of DOGE are clearly weighty and important.

Association of American, Physicians & Surgeons, Inc. v. United States Food & Drug Administration

226 F. Supp. 2d 204 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 17, 2002

Instead, the Act establishes a legislative framework to encourage voluntary testing. … Here, Congress clearly considered a command and control approach.

Dulworth v. U.S. Office Products Co. (In Re U.S. Office Products Co. Securities Litigation)

313 B.R. 73 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 3, 2004

The Bankruptcy Court’s Official Form clearly requests the “name of creditor” who is filing a proof of claim. Fed. R. BaNkr.P. 3001. … In determining what qualifies as an informal proof of claim, courts have used two similar tests.

McCann v. United States Department of Health and Human Services

828 F. Supp. 2d 317 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 15, 2011

To qualify for protection under Exemption 7, agency records must have been compiled for law enforcement purposes. … To satisfy this requirement, an agency “need only ‘establish a rational nexus between 8 the investigation and one of the agency's law enforcement duties and a connection between

Sun v. District of Columbia Government

133 F. Supp. 3d 155 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 30, 2015

Cir. 2014) (“A statement that itself shows . . . bias in the employment decision qualifies as direct evidence.”) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted) (ellipsis in original). … “To evaluate a section 1981 claim, courts use the three-step McDonnell Douglass framework for establishing racial discrimination under Title VII,” Brown v.

Hernandez v. D.C. Department of Corrections

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 15, 2023

District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities … Supp. 2d 213, 220 (D.D.C. 2011) (granting the District’s 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss municipal liability claims and denying leave to amend the complaint as futile where plaintiff failed to clearly allege the existence of

Cunningham v. Colvin

46 F. Supp. 3d 26 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 30, 2014

The ALJ also concluded that Plaintiff did not qualify for Supplemental Security Income payments under section 1614(a)(3)(A) of the Social Security Act. See AR at 23; 42 U.S.C. § 1382(c). … Nevertheless, the ALJ clearly considered Dr.

United States v. Makki

47 F. Supp. 2d 25 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 20, 1999

Under the Guidelines, the government must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant obstructed justice and that his conduct was willful. 3 To establish willfulness, the government must establish “that the … The Application Notes to Section 3C1.1 provide a list of examples of the types of conduct that qualify as obstruction of justice.

Webb v. Hyman

861 F. Supp. 1094 · District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 5, 1994

Breeskin clearly has scientific knowledge regarding the issues of degree of psychological trauma and relationship of that injury to the Defendants’ behavior. … Borzilleri properly qualified his calculations on the best data that was available to him.

NMI Systems, Inc. v. Pillard (In Re NMI Systems, Inc.)

179 B.R. 357 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 29, 1995

But the title was clearly that of an assistant vice president, because Pillard’s immediate superior was now a divisional vice president, Knowles. … Bonuses are paid by well established companies in the industry on a monthly, quarterly or yearly basis.