Case law

Wultz v. Bank of China, Ltd.

304 F.R.D. 38 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 30, 2014

(“Bank”) seeking to establish the Bank’s liability for the 2006 terrorist attack in Tel Aviv, Israel that resulted in the death of sixteen-year-old American citizen Daniel Wultz. Israel’s Mem. at 2– 3. … received an email from the intervenors’ counsel indicating that “he would oppose any future motion to quash” on the basis that “Israel was required to intervene in an action in order to contest the subpoena and assert immunity

Khatri v. Board of Trustees of the University of the District of Columbia

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 11, 2021

Because the documents are clearly distinct, with separate cover pages and page numbers, the Court will refer to and cite the documents individually. … and (2) the provision “indicates that such assignments are made at the discretion of the University” and “Professor Griffin [had] determined not to grant [the plaintiff’s] request because [the plaintiff] did not have a qualifying

Borda v. U.S. Department of Justice, Criminal Division

245 F. Supp. 3d 52 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 28, 2017

As relevant here, FOIA Exemption 6 protects information about individuals in “personnel and medical files and similar files” when its disclosure “would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” 5 U.S.C … See Cobar, 81 F.Supp.3d at 76 (noting that the “generic conditions set forth in [a] [confidential [sjource Agreement” do not “qualify for protection under Exemption 7(D)!’).

Sobin v. District of Columbia Department of Motor Vehicles

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 14, 2020

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 … Plaintiff alleges that the District “established and enforced a regulation in a way that is impossible to follow.”

1306 Lounge, LLC v. Small Business Administration

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 5, 2024

(Free performances or performances for tips only do not qualify.)” Id. at 5 n.2; Defs.’ Mot. at 2 (citing A.R. at 12). … “A plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish [(1)] that [it] is likely to succeed on the merits, [(2)] that [it] is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, [(3)] that the

United States v. All Assets Held at Bank Julius

251 F. Supp. 3d 82 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 27, 2017

dependent on their locality for the government’s jurisdiction’ because ‘to limit their locus to the strictly territorial jurisdiction would be greatly to curtail the scope and usefulness of the statute and leave open a large immunity … account and once upon exiting a U.S. account, Section 2315 clearly applies to EFTs. See United States v. Daccarett, 6 F.3d at 54.

LINCOLN SAV. AND LOAN ASS'N v. Wall

743 F. Supp. 901 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 22, 1990

This case clearly proves this point. … This acquisition was to be made in cash and was to qualify as a contribution to Lincoln's regulatory capital.

Barr Laboratories, Inc. v. Thompson

238 F. Supp. 2d 236 · District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 18, 2002

March, 2002, as a result of a recertification under paragraph III, the FDA altered the status of Pharmachemie and Mylan’s ANDA from final to tentative approval and determined that should AstraZeneca submit studies that qualify … Plaintiff points to the language above and states that, by referencing the period during which an application “may not be approved,” Congress is clearly referring to applications that have not yet received approval.

United States Ex Rel. Digital Healthcare, Inc. v. Affiliated Computer Services, Inc.

778 F. Supp. 2d 37 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 20, 2011

District of Columbia, 224 F.3d 776, 778 (D.C.Cir.2000) (noting the District of Columbia’s Medicaid plan), and pay qualified health providers for a broad range of covered services provided to eligible beneficiaries. … Prince, 753 F.Supp.2d 569, 586 (E.D.Va.2011) (“To be sure, the audit report clearly expresses dissatisfaction with the fact that Blackwater does not require its employees to fill out time sheets in which they certify the

Harris v. Ashcroft

District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 24, 2009

Defendant contends that plaintiff was not an "employee" of the federal government, which defendant characterizes as a condition of the government's waiver of sovereign immunity to a Title VII claim. … It would thus be difficult to establish that Congress has stated that the "threshold 4 The D.C.

United States v. Fajardo Campos

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 10, 2018

First, she maintains that the government’s applications did not establish that intercepting her electronic communications was “necessary” within the meaning of Title III. … And in this Court’s view, the reading of Fajardo Campos’s Blackberry messages qualifies as an “other acquisition” under the plain language of the statute. See id.

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

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 30, 2021

In response to the April 2019 FOIA request, defendant FBI notified plaintiff on April 23, 2019, that its request qualified for the “unusual circumstances” exception to the twenty-day response requirement under FOIA. … In order to qualify for protection under Exemption 6, the information need not be intimate or embarrassing. Horowitz v. Peace Corps, 428 F.3d 271, 279 (D.C. Cir. 2005).

Williams v. Chugach Alaska Corporation

210 F. Supp. 3d 25 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 28, 2016

A-136, Financial Reporting Requirements, is not a statute or a regulation, but simply a guide for federal agencies, intended to “establish[] a central point of reference for all Federal financial reporting guidance for … The Proposed Amended Complaint does not contain facts alleging that the PJCC qualifies as an entity required to prepare financial statements under these statutes such that the circular even applies to it.

Tax Analysts v. Internal Revenue Service

416 F. Supp. 2d 119 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 27, 2006

. § 6110 (i)(l)(A). 2 Under the statute, all documents qualifying as Chief Counsel advice are subject to “public inspection” following the deletion of “the names, addresses, and other identifying details of the person to … In its opposition to plaintiffs Cross Motion for Summary Judgment, defendant argues incongruously that “Chevron clearly applies to a case, such as this one, involving an agency’s construction of a statute which it administers

Massachusetts Coalition for Immigration Reform v. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 11, 2022

The Manual does not qualify as “final agency action” so this Court cannot hear an APA challenge to it. … The Government counters that this claim is unreviewable because DOS is merely carrying out Presidential directives, and the APA does not waive sovereign immunity.

International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers v. Donovan

570 F. Supp. 210 · District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 15, 1983

That interpretation, although accorded a presumption of correctness, is clearly erroneous in this Court’s view. … Congress did not establish training as an entitlement, and it could not require the Secretary to spend more than the amount available. 2.

Williams v. Verizon Washington, D.C., Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 2018

This construction of the facts is belied by the facts in the instant record, which establish quite clearly that Williams lied about his whereabouts when he was questioned during the investigation, and that his deceptiveness … (“If he was sick, in bed, attending a funeral in Shanghai, and Verizon had notice of his leave, it is an FMLA qualifying incident.”)), is likewise meritless.

Appleby v. Harvey

517 F. Supp. 2d 253 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 29, 2007

of this issue “adequately explains its result,” Dickson, 68 F.3d at 1404 , and clearly establishes that the ABCMR “examined the relevant data and articulated a satisfactory explanation for its action including a rational … The plaintiff clearly became the subject of an investigation when the whistleblower complaint was received.

Buzzfeed Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security

District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 27, 2022

When an agency invokes both exemptions, courts “focus” on Exemption 7(C) because it “establishes a lower bar for withholding material.” Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Wash. v. … Cir. 1998) (explaining that a new declaration “is favored where agency affidavits are facially inadequate” because “otherwise the district court is effectively left to speculate about” whether a document qualifies for

Geneme v. Holder

935 F. Supp. 2d 184 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 2013

USCIS is currently consulting with the Department of Homeland Security to determine whether supporters of the Oromo Liberation Front will qualify for exemption from inadmissibility under the Secretary’s criteria. … Supp. 2d 1, 8 (D.D.C. 2011) (agreeing that “the Secretary clearly has discretionary authority to adjudicate the plaintiff’s adjustment of status, see 8 U.S.C. § 1159(b)”).