ELGABROWNY v. CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY et al
Plaintiff: IBRAHIM ELGABROWNY
Defendant: CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE and U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Case Number: 1:2017cv00066
Filed: January 11, 2017
Court: US District Court for the District of Columbia
Office: Washington, DC Office
County: 88888
Presiding Judge: Tanya S. Chutkan
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 05 U.S.C. ยง 552
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
October 27, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 97 MEMORANDUM OPINION GRANTING the Motion to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) 94 filed by Defendants, the United States Department of State and the Central Intelligence Agency. Accordingly, the case a gainst them is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and D.C. Local Civil Rule 83.23. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and the accompanying Order 98 to Plaintiff at his current address of record. Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 10/27/2021. (psu3)
March 25, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 82 MEMORANDUM OPINION granting EOUSA's 62 Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment and dismissing the case against EOUSA and DOJ with prejudice. Please see Memorandum Opinion and accompanying Order 83 for further details. Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 3/25/2020. (dm)
March 31, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 58 MEMORANDUM OPINION GRANTING FBI's Motion for Summary Judgment 45 ; DENYING EOUSA's Motion for Summary Judgment 45 ; GRANTING in part and DENYING in part CIA's Motion for Summary Judgment 47 ; DENYING Plaintiff's Cross-Motion fo r Summary Judgment 51 ; DENYING Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Portions of the Stone Declaration [51 at 33-6]; DENYING Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Portions of the Hardy Declaration [51 at 37-40]; DENYING Plaintiff's First Motion for In Camera Review & Discovery [51 at 41-4]; DENYING Plaintiff's Second Motion for In Camera Review & Discovery [51 at 45-6]; DENYING Plaintiff's Third Motion for In Camera Review 56 . See document for further details. Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 3/31/2019. (dm)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the District Of Columbia District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: ELGABROWNY v. CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: IBRAHIM ELGABROWNY
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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?