American Civil Liberties Union et al v. Department of Defense et al
| American Civil Liberties Union and American Civil Liberties Union Foundation |
| Department of Defense, Department of Justice and Department of State |
| 1:2017cv09972 |
| December 21, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Edgardo Ramos |
| Freedom of Information Act |
| 05 U.S.C. ยง 552 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
52
REVISED SCHEDULING ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the briefing schedule set forth in the Court's February 19, 2021 Order is adjourned. The government will produce a redacted version of the document sought in the plaintiffs' FOIA request s by April 30, 2021. The parties will meet and confer and submit a status report by May 28, 2021. To the extent any issues remain to be litigated, the status report will include a proposed briefing schedule. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 4/22/2021) (cf) Modified on 4/22/2021 (cf).
|
|
Filing
48
REVISED SCHEDULING ORDER granting 47 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the schedule set forth in the Court's January 15, 2021 Order is amended as follows: Government's consolidated motio n due: April 23, 2021. Plaintiffs' oppositions and cross-motions due: May 21, 2021. Government's consolidated opposition and reply due: June 18, 2021. Plaintiffs' replies due: July 9, 2021. (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 2/19/2021) (mro)
|
|
Filing
40
MEMORANDUM OPINION: For these reasons, the Court finds that the Defense Department never properly invoked Exemption 3 and that its invocation of Exemption 1 was rendered illogical and implausible by the release of the Niger ambush report. Accordingly, the agencies' motion for summary judgment was DENIED, and the cross-motions of both the ACLU and the Times were GRANTED. The instructions within the Court's Order of September 29, 2020, Doc. 39, remain in effect. (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 10/5/2020) (mro)
|
|
Filing
39
ORDER granting 32 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment; denying 28 Motion for Summary Judgment. For the reasons set forth in a Memorandum Opinion to be filed separately, the defendants' motions for summary judgment are DENIED and the plaintiffs' cross-motions for summary judgment are GRANTED. The defendants are ORDERED to confirm or deny the existence of records responsive to the plaintiffs' FOIA requests. The parties are further directed to submit, by Nove mber 1, 2020, a schedule for the defendants' compliance with this Order and the further disposition of this case. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the following motions: Docs. 28 and 32 in 17 Civ. 9972, and Docs. 13 and 17 in 20 Civ. 43. (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 9/29/2020) (mro)
|
|
Filing
25
ORDER re: (8 in 1:20-cv-00043-ER) Letter filed by The New York Times Company, (23 in 1:17-cv-09972-ER) Letter filed by American Civil Liberties Union, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation. For the reasons set forth above, the Court set s the following consolidated briefing schedule for both actions: motions due February 12, 2020; oppositions due March 11, 2020; and replies due March 25, 2020. Furthermore, in light of this briefing schedule, the request for a pre-motion conference filed in 17 Civ. 9972, Doc. 23, is DENIED as moot. It is SO ORDERED. (Motions due by 2/12/2020., Responses due by 3/11/2020, Replies due by 3/25/2020.) (Signed by Judge Edgardo Ramos on 1/15/2020) (kv)
|
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 New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
