Case: Electronic Frontier Foundation v. Office of the Director of National Intelligence

3:07-cv-05278 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Filed Date: Oct. 17, 2007

Closed Date: 2008

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On October 17, 2007, the Electronic Frontier Foundation filed this lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The plaintiff sued the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 5 U.S.C. § 552. The plaintiff, represented by in-house counsel, asked the court for a preliminary injunction for expedited release of the information sought. The plaintiff claimed that FOIA entitled it to expedited release of requested do…

On October 17, 2007, the Electronic Frontier Foundation filed this lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The plaintiff sued the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 5 U.S.C. § 552. The plaintiff, represented by in-house counsel, asked the court for a preliminary injunction for expedited release of the information sought. The plaintiff claimed that FOIA entitled it to expedited release of requested documents.

Specifically, the plaintiff requested documents relating to communications between ODNI and telecommunications companies or staff of members of the Senate or the House of Representatives related to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) amendments. It also claimed that defendant did not properly expedite the documents as would be proper and had also failed to process the request under the standard deadline.

On November 27, 2007, Susan Illston found that ODNI failed to show any evidence of extraordinary circumstances. As such, the court ordered ODNI to provide an initial release to plaintiff's FOIA request by November 30, 2007, as well as release all non-exempt documents by December 10, 2007. The court also ordered the defendant to release an affidavit with the reasoning for withholding any documents it did not release.

On June 4, 2008, the court granted plaintiff $52,271.97 for costs and attorneys' fees. The court found that plaintiff's rates were reasonable but its hours were too high when calculating the requested $68,205.00 award amount.

Summary Authors

David Smellie (9/30/2016)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4169673/parties/electronic-frontier-foundation-v-office-of-the-director-of-national/


Judge(s)
Attorney for Plaintiff
Attorney for Defendant

Barnea, Jean-David (California)

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other

Ahrens, Julie Angela (California)

Balasubramani, Venkat (California)

Barclay, Michael (California)

Bavitz, Christopher T. (California)

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other

Ahrens, Julie Angela (California)

Balasubramani, Venkat (California)

Barclay, Michael (California)

Bavitz, Christopher T. (California)

Beckerman, Ray (California)

Berlage, Jan Ingham (California)

Brick, Ann (California)

Brown, Nicholas A (California)

Cardozo, Nathan Daniel (California)

Carolan, Duffy (California)

Chadwick, James M. (California)

Cohn, Cindy A. (California)

Cope, Sophia (California)

Crocker, Andrew (California)

Fakhoury, Hanni M (California)

Fenton, James P (California)

Goodman, Melissa (California)

Greene, David Allen (California)

Held, Kenneth P. (California)

Jaffer, Jameel (California)

Jr, Charles Lee (California)

Kelley, Matthew Edward (California)

Kissinger, Ashley Ivy (California)

Ladin, Dror (California)

Leatherbury, Thomas S (California)

Lemley, Mark A (California)

Leod, Richard D. (California)

Lohmann, Fred von (California)

Lynch, Jennifer Ann (California)

Mackey, Aaron David (California)

Mass, Julia Harumi (California)

McSherry, Corynne (California)

Michelman, Scott Matthew (California)

Moss, Alexandra H (California)

Mudd, Charles Lee (California)

Nazer, Daniel K (California)

Petrolis, Mark Anthony (California)

Phillips, Rebecca Lynn (California)

PHV, Corynne McSherry (California)

Ranieri, Vera (California)

Rodewald, Tenaya M (California)

Rumold, Mark Thomas (California)

Russell, Erin Kathryn (California)

Samuels, Julie P. (California)

Schwartz, Adam Daniel (California)

Stoltz, Mitchell L. (California)

Tully, L. Danielle (California)

Ulmet, Lucian (California)

Vick, Kevin Lester (California)

Walsh, Christopher Cody (California)

Wasylik, Dineen Pashoukos (California)

Williams, Jamie L (California)

Wilson, Herbert W. (California)

Zimmerman, Matthew J (California)

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

3:07-cv-05278

Docket

June 4, 2008

June 4, 2008

Docket
1

3:07-cv-05278

Complaint for Injunctive Relief

Oct. 17, 2007

Oct. 17, 2007

Complaint
26

3:07-cv-05278

Opinion on Preliminary Injunction

Nov. 27, 2007

Nov. 27, 2007

Order/Opinion

2007 WL 4208311

44

3:07-cv-05278

Stipulation of Dismissal

March 4, 2008

March 4, 2008

Order/Opinion
64

3:07-cv-05278

Order Granting in Part Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney's Fees and Costs

June 4, 2008

June 4, 2008

Order/Opinion

2008 WL 2331959

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4169673/electronic-frontier-foundation-v-office-of-the-director-of-national/

Last updated Dec. 17, 2024, 8:47 p.m.

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.

Case Details

State / Territory: California

Case Type(s):

National Security

Special Collection(s):

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act -- Telephony Metadata

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Oct. 17, 2007

Closing Date: 2008

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Electronic Frontier Foundation

Plaintiff Type(s):

Non-profit NON-religious organization

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Federal

Defendant Type(s):

Jurisdiction-wide

Case Details

Causes of Action:

FOIA (Freedom of Information Act), 5 U.S.C. § 552

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Non-settlement Outcome

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Attorneys fees

Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order

Source of Relief:

Litigation

Content of Injunction:

Preliminary relief granted

Required disclosure

Amount Defendant Pays: 52,271.97

Issues

General/Misc.:

Confidentiality

Records Disclosure

Search policies

Terrorism/Post 9-11 issues