BAGWELL v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Filing 21

ORDER granting in part and denying without prejudice in part 12 Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 13 Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment; denying 19 Defendant's Motion to Stay; and setting a schedule for further proceedings. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 3/3/2016. (lccrc3)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
RYAN BAGWELL,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 15-cv-00531 (CRC)

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE,
Defendant.
ORDER
Having considered the Defendant’s [19] February 29, 2016 status report and supplemental
Vaughn Index, the Court finds that the Department of Justice has adequately justified its
withholding in full of the 104 previously withheld pages of documents as to which the Court
reserved judgment in its December 18, 2015 Memorandum Opinion. See Bagwell v. U.S. Dep’t of
Justice, No. 15-CV-00531 (CRC), 2015 WL 9272836, at *1 (D.D.C. Dec. 18, 2015). The
combination of the supplemental Vaughn Index and the original affidavits also lead the Court to
find that DOJ has released all reasonably segregable material in those documents. Therefore, it is
hereby
ORDERED that Defendant’s [12] Motion for Summary Judgment be GRANTED IN
PART with respect to those documents. It is further
ORDERED that Defendant’s [12] Motion for Summary Judgment be DENIED without
prejudice in all other respects. It is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s [13] Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment be DENIED.
It is further
ORDERED that [19] Defendant’s Motion to Stay be DENIED. It is further

ORDERED that any overall objection by Defendant to the burdensomeness of Plaintiff’s
FOIA request be filed, in the form of a renewed motion for summary judgement (or partial
summary judgment), by March 30, 2016. In this regard, the government is reminded of the
guidance offered by the Court at the February 11, 2016 telephonic status conference regarding the
adequacy of treating certain groups of self-evident grand jury materials on a categorical basis so as
to avoid the need for page-by-page review. It is further
ORDERED that, absent any wholesale burdensomeness objection, Defendant begin
processing the request (or any remaining part of the request not challenged as unduly burdensome)
upon the payment of applicable processing and duplication fees. Defendant shall produce all nonexempt material on a monthly, rolling basis. Defendant shall complete the production and a
Vaughn Index of any withheld material within six months of its commencement absent leave of the
Court. The Court will set a schedule for further dispositive motions by either party at the
conclusion of the production, as necessary. It is further
ORDERED that the parties jointly file a further status report every 60 days, beginning
March 31, 2016.
SO ORDERED.

CHRISTOPHER R. COOPER
United States District Judge
Date:

March 3, 2016

2