The New York Times Company et al v. United States Department Of Justice
| The New York Times Company and Kenneth P. Vogel |
| United States Department of Justice |
| 1:2018cv02095 |
| March 8, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| New York |
| Lewis A. Kaplan |
| Ona T. Wang |
| 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
77
OPINION AND ORDER re: 49 CROSS MOTION for Summary Judgment , filed by The New York Times Company, Kenneth P. Vogel, 42 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment with respect to those records withheld under FOIA exemption 7(A), filed by United States Department of Justice. For the foregoing reasons, the Court finds that the records properly were withheld in full pursuant to Exemption 7(A). Thus, DOJ's motion for partial summary judgment is GRANTED and Plaintiffs cross-motion for partial summary judgment is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close the open gavels at ECF Nos. 42 and 49. In view of the Courts disposition of the cross-motions, as well as the parties agreement approved by the Court on November 9, 2018 (see Memo Endorsement, ECF No. 41), the parties shall advise the Court within seven (7) days as to the issues remaining in this case, if any. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron on 7/22/2019) (kl)
|
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.
