Dickman v. United States Department of Justice

Filing 9

ORDER of Service. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 8/8/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service). (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/8/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 MICHAEL DICKMAN, Plaintiff, 8 9 Case No. 17-cv-02042-EMC ORDER OF SERVICE v. Docket No. 1 10 11 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, For the Northern District of California United States District Court Defendant. 12 13 Plaintiff, a prisoner at San Quentin State Prison, has filed this pro se action under the 14 Freedom of Information Act , 5 U.S.C. § 552 (“FOIA”), and the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552a, 15 seeking agency records from the United States Department of Justice‟s Federal Bureau of 16 Investigation (FBI) consisting of “G.P.S. tracking records that were recorded, without a warrant, 17 by the FBI and San Diego, California City Police Department on July 21, 2008 through August 12, 18 2008.” Docket No. 1 at 2. Plaintiff alleges that he submitted a FOIA/Privacy Act request, and 19 that the “FBI acknowledged locating the proper records and to [the date of filing of the complaint] 20 claim the request is in „the perfected backlog‟ and „awaits assignment to a Government 21 Information Specialist for further processing.‟” Id. Plaintiff further alleges that he first submitted 22 his request on June 19, 2015, and that he has been informed since October 29, 2015, that his 23 request is in the “„perfected backlog‟” waiting for an analyst. Id. at 4. 24 FOIA calls for “broad disclosure of Government records.” CIA v. Sims, 471 U.S. 159, 166 25 (1985). To ensure broad disclosure, FOIA “gives individuals a judicially-enforceable right of 26 access to government agency documents.” Lion Raisins v. Dep’t of Agric., 354 F.3d 1072, 1079 27 (9th Cir. 2004), overruled on other grounds in Animal Legal Defense Fund v. U.S. Food & Drug 28 Admin., 836 F.3d 987, 989-90 (9th Cir. 2016); 5 U.S.C. § 552. FOIA provides, in relevant part, 1 that: “each agency, upon any request for records which (i) reasonably describes such records and 2 (ii) is made in accordance with published rules stating the time, place, fees (if any), and 3 procedures to be followed, shall make the records promptly available to any person.” 5 U.S.C. § 4 552(a)(3)(A). There is a strong presumption in favor of disclosure. See U.S. Dep’t of State v. Ray, 5 502 U.S. 164, 173 (1991). This “general philosophy of full agency disclosure [applies] unless 6 information is exempted under clearly delineated statutory language,” and these exemptions must 7 be narrowly construed. John Doe Agency v. John Doe Corp., 493 U.S. 146, 151-52, 154 (1989) 8 (quotation marks and citation omitted). The Privacy Act “safeguards the public from unwarranted 9 collection, maintenance, use and dissemination of personal information contained in agency properly used, and by imposing responsibilities on federal agencies to maintain their records 12 For the Northern District of California records ... by allowing an individual to participate in ensuring that his records are accurate and 11 United States District Court 10 accurately.” Bartel v. FAA, 725 F.2d 1403, 1407 (D.C.Cir.1984). “One of the ways the Privacy 13 Act accomplishes this goal is to require any agency that maintains a “system of records” to 14 provide information pertaining to a particular person to that person when he or she asks to access 15 it. 5 U.S.C. § 552a(d)(1). . . . [L]ike FOIA, the Privacy Act provides for a cause of action to 16 compel compliance [under Section 552a](d)(1).” Mobley v. C.I.A., 806 F.3d 568, 586 (D.C. Cir. 17 2015). 18 Plaintiff appears to be alleging that the delay of 17 months and counting was tantamount to 19 a refusal by the FBI to produce the requested documents. Liberally construed, Plaintiff‟s 20 allegations appear to state a cognizable claim under FOIA/Privacy Act and should proceed. See 21 Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990) (pro se pleadings must be 22 liberally construed). Good cause appearing therefor, 23 1. The Clerk shall issue summons and the United States Marshal shall serve, without 24 prepayment of fees, copies of the complaint in this matter, all attachments thereto, and copies of 25 this order upon the FBI. The Clerk also shall send a copy of the summons and complaint to 26 Defendant‟s counsel, the United States Attorney for the Northern District of California, and to the 27 Attorney General of the United States in Washington, D.C. The Clerk also shall send a copy of 28 this order to Plaintiff. 2 1 2 2. In order to expedite the resolution of this case, the following briefing schedule for dispositive motions is set: a. 3 No later than October 6, 2017, Defendant must file and serve a motion for 4 summary judgment or other dispositive motion. If Defendant is of the opinion that this case 5 cannot be resolved by summary judgment, Defendant must so inform the Court prior to the date 6 the motion is due. If Defendant files a motion for summary judgment, Defendant must provide to 7 Plaintiff a new Rand notice regarding summary judgment procedures at the time it files such a 8 motion. See Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934, 939 (9th Cir. 2012). b. 9 Plaintiff‟s opposition to the summary judgment or other dispositive motion Plaintiff must bear in mind the notice and warning regarding summary judgment provided later in 12 For the Northern District of California must be filed with the Court and served upon Defendant no later than November 3, 2017. 11 United States District Court 10 this order as he prepares his opposition to any motion for summary judgment. c. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 If Defendant wishes to file a reply brief, the reply brief must be filed and served no later than November 17, 2017. 3. Plaintiff is provided the following notices and warnings about the procedures for motions for summary judgment: The defendants may make a motion for summary judgment by which they seek to have your case dismissed. A motion for summary judgment under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will, if granted, end your case. . . . Rule 56 tells you what you must do in order to oppose a motion for summary judgment. Generally, summary judgment must be granted when there is no genuine issue of material fact -- that is, if there is no real dispute about any fact that would affect the result of your case, the party who asked for summary judgment is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, which will end your case. When a party you are suing makes a motion for summary judgment that is properly supported by declarations (or other sworn testimony), you cannot simply rely on what your complaint says. Instead, you must set out specific facts in declarations, depositions, answers to interrogatories, or authenticated documents, as provided in Rule 56(e), that contradict the facts shown in the defendants‟ declarations and documents and show that there is a genuine issue of material fact for trial. If you do not submit your own evidence in opposition, summary judgment, if appropriate, may be entered against you. If summary judgment is granted, your case will be dismissed and there will be no trial. Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 962-63 (9th Cir. 1998). If Defendant files a motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, 3 1 he is seeking to have the case dismissed. As with other defense summary judgment motions, if a 2 motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies is granted, Plaintiff‟s 3 case will be dismissed and there will be no trial. 4 4. All communications by Plaintiff with the Court must be served on Defendant‟s 5 counsel by mailing a true copy of the document to Defendant‟s counsel. The Court may disregard 6 any document which a party files but fails to send a copy of to his opponent. Until a defendant‟s 7 counsel has been designated, Plaintiff may mail a true copy of the document directly to the 8 defendant, but once a defendant is represented by counsel, all documents must be mailed to 9 counsel rather than directly to the party. 10 5. Discovery may be taken in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. No further court order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(a)(2) or Local Rule 16 is required 12 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 11 before the parties may conduct discovery. 13 6. Plaintiff is responsible for prosecuting this case. Plaintiff must promptly keep the 14 Court informed of any change of address and must comply with the Court‟s orders in a timely 15 fashion. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute pursuant 16 to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Plaintiff must file a notice of change of address in every 17 pending case every time he is moved to a new facility. 18 19 7. Plaintiff is cautioned that he must include the case name and case number for this case on any document he submits to the Court for consideration in this case. 20 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 23 24 25 Dated: August 8, 2017 ______________________________________ EDWARD M. CHEN United States District Judge 26 27 28 4

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?