WILLIAMS v. EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR U.S. ATTORNEYS

Filing 44

MEMORANDUM OPINION accompanying final order issued separately this day. Signed by Judge Dabney L. Friedrich on 3/30/20.(ah)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DAVID WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff,
v.

No. 18-cv-19 (DLF)

EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR U.S.
ATTORNEYS,
Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION
In response to Defendant’s Supplemental Motion for Summary Judgment, plaintiff
David Williams concedes that defendant Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA)
is entitled to summary judgment on the issues remaining in this FOIA case. See Pl.’s Concession
to Def.’s Statement of Material Facts and Supplemental Mot. for Summ. J., ECF No. 42; Mar.
25, 2019 Mem. Op. and Order, ECF No. 23 (granting EOUSA partial summary judgment). And
“once all the documents are released to the requesting party, there no longer is any case or
controversy” to resolve on summary judgment. Bayala v. DHS, 827 F.3d 31, 34 (D.C. Cir.
2016); see Shapiro v. United States Dep't of Justice, 239 F. Supp. 3d 100, 106 n.1 (D.D.C. 2017)
(noting that “to the extent the FOIA requester does not seek to compel the release of the withheld
information, . . . the Court need not—and should not—enter summary judgment in favor of the
government. Rather, . . . there is simply no dispute to resolve.”) (distinguishing Winston &

1

Strawn, LLP v. McLean, 843 F.3d 503, 505 (D.C. Cir. 2016)). Accordingly, EOUSA’s
supplemental motion will be denied. A separate order will issue contemporaneously.

________________________
DABNEY L. FRIEDRICH
United States District Judge

March 30, 2020

2