Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
On January 15, 2009, the Court ordered (docket # 66) that defendant, the Office of
Administration (OA), preserve all records which are “potentially responsive” to plaintiff’s April
16, 2007 and April 18, 2007 requests under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. §
552, pending resolution of plaintiff's appeal from this Court's decision of June 16, 2008 that OA
is not an agency subject to FOIA. The Court further required OA “to physically segregate such
documents from the records of the incoming administration.” Id. In addition, only OA’s Chief
Administrative Officer (or his or her designee) shall have access to the records “for the sole
purpose of ensuring the records are properly preserved and stored until the D.C. Circuit issues a
ruling” resolving the issue in plaintiff’s pending appeal. Id. The Court also ordered that “OA
shall not transfer any potentially responsive records out of its custody or control without leave of
Defendant moves to amend the January 15 Order to allow access to the records that have
been segregated by OA as potentially responsive to plaintiff’s FOIA requests in this case. The
records at issue here are relevant to two pending consolidated cases, i.e. Citizens for
Case 1:07-cv-00964-CKK Document 68 Filed 03/13/2009 Page 2 of 3
Responsibility and Ethics in Washington v. Executive Office of the President, et al. No. 1:07-cv-
01707 (HHK/JMF) and National Security Archive v. Executive Office of the President, No. 1:07-
cv-01577 (HHK/JMF). The parties in these consolidated cases are in the process of exploring
whether the issues raised therein can be resolved by settlement rather than continued litigation
and, thus, it is necessary for the incumbent administration, including Department of Justice
attorneys, to review the records covered by the January 15 Order. Assuming the parties in the
consolidated cases agree on a process for resolving those cases and the motion to amend is
granted, the records would be reviewed by personnel in the current White House Counsel’s
Office, OA, the Department of Justice, and the National Archives and Records Administration
Pursuant to Local Rule 7(m), counsel for defendant consulted with counsel for plaintiff,
Anne Weismann, who stated that she does not oppose this motion.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, the motion to amend should be granted to allow access to the
records that are potentially responsive to plaintiff’s FOIA requests in this case for review in
MICHAEL F. HERTZ
Acting Assistant Attorney General
JEFFREY A. TAYLOR
United States Attorney
ELIZABETH J. SHAPIRO
Deputy Branch Director
2
Case 1:07-cv-00964-CKK Document 68 Filed 03/13/2009 Page 3 of 3
3
Case 1:07-cv-00964-CKK Document 68-2 Filed 03/13/2009 Page 1 of 1