Adams et al v. United States Department of Justice et al

Filing 47

ORDER ADOPTING 44 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS in its entirety. Further denying 28 Motion for Summary Judgment and granting in part and denying in part 35 Motion for Summary Judgment, as set forth. The Defendants are directed to submit Document 3 for in camera review by the Court by 10/5/12. Signed by Honorable P. K. Holmes, III on September 26, 2012. (lw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
HARRISON DIVISION
DALE B. ADAMS
v.

PLAINTIFF
Case No. 3:10-CV-03117

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE;
and ERIC H. HOLDER, UNITED STATES
ATTORNEY GENERAL

DEFENDANTS

ORDER
Currently before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 44) filed in this case
on August 8, 2012, by the Honorable James R. Marschewski, Chief United States Magistrate Judge
for the Western District of Arkansas. The objection period has passed without objections being filed
by either party.1
The Court has reviewed this case and, being well and sufficiently advised, finds as follows:
the Report and Recommendation is proper and should be and hereby is ADOPTED IN ITS
ENTIRETY.

Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the Magistrate Judge’s Report and

Recommendations, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 28) is
DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 35)
is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Defendants’ Motion is granted insofar as
Plaintiff’s FOIA claims concerning Documents 1 and 2, the expedited processing claim, the APA
1

The Court notes that, subsequent to the entry of the Report and Recommendation in this
case, Mr. Adams did ask the Court on August 10, 2012, in case 3:12-cv-03076-PKH, to dismiss
“every FOIA case” he had filed with this Court, including the instant matter. (Doc. 4, case 3:12-cv03076-PKH). He withdrew that request just 13 days later on August 23, 2012. (Doc. 5, case 3:12cv-03076-PKH).
-1-

claim, the EAJA claim, the ARRA claim, and the Patriot Watch List claim are DISMISSED.
Defendants’ Motion is denied with respect to Plaintiff’s FOIA claim concerning Document 3.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants are directed to submit Document 3 for in
camera review by the Court by October 5, 2012.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 26th day of September, 2012.

/s/P. K. Holmes, III
P.K. HOLMES, III
CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-