Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2015-11-03 Letter To L. Flores From DOJ USAO EDNY Re Dispositive Motion Schedule (FOIA Lawsuit)
2015-11-03 Letter To L. Flores From DOJ USAO EDNY Re Dispositive Motion Schedule (FOIA Lawsuit)
Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Eastern District of New York
271 Cadman Plaza East-7th Floor
Brooklyn, New York 11201
November 3, 2015
By Email and First-Class Mail
Louis Flores
34-21 77th Street, Apt. #406
Jackson Heights, New York 11372
Re:
Louis Flores
November 3, 2015
Page 2
In your October 26, 2015 letter, you inform the undersigned that you have submitted a
FOIA request to the Civil Rights Division. 1 The undersigneds receipt of that request in no way
constitutes an acknowledgement that a proper FOIA request was submitted to that office and
does not indicate that the Civil Rights Division will accept, acknowledge, or undertake any
action upon the undersigneds receipt of the request. A FOIA request to components of DOJ
must be made to the FOIA office of that component, and a FOIA request must comply with 5
U.S.C. 522(a)(3). The undersigned does not undertake any obligations or responsibilities in
connection with the FOIA request attached to your October 26, 2015 letter.
Please note that the parties are to submit a joint report to the Court by November 6, 2015.
Defendant believes that there is no reason to extend the Court-ordered deadline. To that end,
enclosed please find a proposed Joint Status Letter, with proposed briefing schedule. Kindly
advise if we have your consent to the proposed Letter and briefing schedule.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Very truly yours,
ROBERT L. CAPERS
United States Attorney
By:
s/Rukhsanah L. Singh
RUKHSANAH L. SINGH
Assistant U.S. Attorney
(718) 254-6498
rukhsanah.singh@usdoj.gov
In your question numbered 4(m)(i), you note that the undersigned stated that there was
no other component at the DOJ that contained a criminal division. (Oct. 26, 2015 Letter at p.
10). Please note that the undersigned stated that there was no other criminal division component
that would have guidelines for the prosecution of activists other than the OAAG.
November _, 2015
By ECF
Honorable Roanne L. Mann
United States Magistrate Judge
United States District Court
Eastern District of New York
225 Cadman Plaza East
Brooklyn, New York 11201
Re:
activists, and to consider voluntarily producing at least some of the documents listed on an
index that Plaintiff had served that same day. (Id.).
Following the September 16, 2015 conference with the Court, Defendant DOJ
voluntarily searched within the Office of the Assistant Attorney General (OAAG) of the
Criminal Division in Washington, D.C. for any written guidelines for prosecution of
activists. 1 (Dkt. No. 14). Defendant also voluntarily searched for and collected documents
that appeared to be responsive to some of Plaintiffs discovery requests set forth in his
September 16, 2015 Index. Defendant conducted these searches even though Plaintiffs
FOIA request that is the subject of this action was directed solely to the EOUSA, which
processes requests for USAOs records, and did not seek DOJ Criminal Division records.
By letter to Plaintiff dated October 13, 2015, Defendant provided copies of
two declarations outlining the searches for records responsive to Plaintiffs April 2013 FOIA
request (as suggested by Your Honor during the September 16, 2015 conference), and
provided documents sought in Plaintiffs September 16, 2015 Index that were voluntarily
gathered. In doing so, Defendant expressly stated that it was not waiving its objections to
discovery or agreeing to the broadening of the FOIA request that is the subject of this action.
By letter dated October 15, 2015, Defendant informed Plaintiff that the OAAGs search did
not locate any guidelines for the prosecution of activists.
On October 16, 2015, the parties had a conference call. During that call,
Plaintiff indicated that he would review the materials provided to him and provide a letter
outlining remaining issues he had as to the response to the FOIA request and the additional
materials voluntarily provided.
On October 26, 2015, Plaintiff served Defendant with an 11-page singlespaced letter seeking additional information and raising numerous questions as to the
searches (including those voluntarily undertaken), the discretionary release of publiclyavailable documents, and Defendants October 13, 2015 letter and materials provided
therewith. On November 3, 2015, Defendant provided a response to Plaintiffs October 26,
2015 letter.
It is Defendant DOJs position that all non-exempt records responsive to
Plaintiffs FOIA request to EOUSA that is the subject of this action have been released to
Plaintiff. Plaintiff will not agree to discontinue this action. Accordingly, motion practice
will be necessary.
The parties propose the following briefing schedule, subject to the Courts
approval:
By November 20, 2015, Defendant to file and serve its motion for
summary judgment;
By December 21, 2015, Plaintiff to file and serve his opposition and
any cross-motion; and
January 20, 2016, Defendant to file and serve its reply and opposition
to any cross-motion.
We appreciate the Courts attention to this matter.
Respectfully submitted,
ROBERT L. CAPERS
United States Attorney
By:
RUKHSANAH L. SINGH
Assistant U.S. Attorney
(718) 254-6498
cc: