Case: Project for Privacy and Surveillance Accountability, Inc. v. United States Department of Justice

1:20-cv-03657 | U.S. District Court for the District of District of Columbia

Filed Date: Dec. 14, 2020

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On December 14, 2020, the Project for Privacy and Surveillance Accountability, a nonpartisan nonprofit that advocates for privacy from government surveillance, filed this lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The plaintiff sued the United States Department of Justice, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the National Security Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the State Department, under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Represented by private counsel, the plaintiffs sought an order requiring the defendants to conduct searches and produce any and all records responsive to Plaintiff’s FOIA requests, enjoin the defendants from continuing to withhold the records, and grant an award of attorneys’ fees and other litigation costs to the plaintiff. The plaintiff claimed that defendants were obligated to gather and review the requested records, communicate to the plaintiff why they were going to withhold any records, and inform the plaintiff of the appeals process, but the defendants “did not perform any of the required activities by the applicable statutory deadlines.” Instead, they issued Glomar responses, meaning they declined to either confirm or deny whether they had the records the plaintiff wanted because saying whether the records existed would be harmful.

The plaintiff had asked all of the departments and agencies that it sued for records related to surveillance conducted pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, 50 U.S.C. § 1881a, permits the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence to conduct foreign intelligence surveillance targeting the communications of non-U.S. persons located abroad. The government need not establish probable cause that the target of electronic surveillance is a foreign power or agent of a foreign power, nor must the government specify the nature and location of the facilities or places that surveillance will occur. Communications of U.S. citizens and residents are frequently collected “incidentally” if those U.S. persons are communicating with or about a targeted foreigner.

Here, the plaintiff asked these agencies about “unmasking”—i.e., when the names of people being surveilled are revealed in intelligence summaries—and “upstreaming”—i.e., when existing intelligence data is searched based on a person’s name. Based on media reports, the plaintiff claimed that members of Congress who sit on intelligence committees frequently have their names revealed in surveillance intelligence summaries, and argued that the prevalence of this “unmasking” might be the result of members of the intelligence community targeting the congresspeople who oversee their agencies. The plaintiff also pointed to evidence that members of the public may have improperly had their names “upstreamed,” which could violate the Fourth Amendment.

The case was assigned to Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell.

On September 1, 2021, the defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. Subsequently, the plaintiff filed a cross-motion for summary judgment on November 10, 2021.

On September 19, 2022, the court granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment and denied the plaintiffs’ motion. The court held that the defendants properly relied on exemptions for their Glomar responses to the FOIA request. First, the requested records were exempt from FOIA because an agency “may refuse to confirm or deny the existence or nonexistence of requested records whenever the fact of their existence or nonexistence is itself classified.” The court found that providing the requested documents would be harmful because it would indicate whether the relevant members of Congress had been surveilled and identified in intelligence reports, which would reveal information about the operations of the intelligence community. Second, the requested records were exempt because the National Security Act of 1947 prevents information about “intelligence sources and methods” from being disclosed through FOIA. Third, the requested records were exempt because they are related to law enforcement activities and could contain information about law enforcement procedure or about private individuals. The court further held that the defendants did not have to even look for the requested records, because doing so would be pointless if they were not going to provide them. 2022 WL 4365745.

On November 18, 2022, the plaintiff appealed the judgment to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The case number is 22-5303.

On October 23, 2023, the plaintiff filed its brief in the D.C. Circuit, arguing that the district court erred in allowing the defendants to “to rely on conclusory affidavits to justify shirking their statutory duty to search for responsive records.” The plaintiff also requested that the D.C. Circuit initially hear the case en banc so that the full circuit could overturn its own precedent. A few weeks later, on November 9, the D.C. Circuit denied the petition for initial hearing en banc. 2023 WL 7413945.

As of November 25, 2023, the appeal is pending.

show full summary

Summary Authors

Venesa Haska (11/25/2023)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/18741266/parties/project-for-privacy-and-surveillance-accountability-inc-v-united-states/

Judge(s)

Howell, Beryl Alaine (District of Columbia)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Attorney, Gene Clayton (District of Columbia)

Attorney, Brian J. (District of Columbia)

Field, Brian J. (District of Columbia)

Attorney for Defendant

Lawrence, R. Craig (District of Columbia)

Judge(s)

Howell, Beryl Alaine (District of Columbia)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Attorney, Gene Clayton (District of Columbia)

Attorney, Brian J. (District of Columbia)

Field, Brian J. (District of Columbia)

Schaerr, Gene C. (District of Columbia)

Attorney for Defendant

Lawrence, R. Craig (District of Columbia)

Silverman, Bradley (District of Columbia)

Simon, Jeremy S. (District of Columbia)

Attorney Contact Information via CourtListener

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

	Document
1 1:20-cv-03657	Complaint	Dec. 14, 2020	Dec. 14, 2020 Complaint
23 1:20-cv-03657	Memorandum Opinion	Sept. 19, 2022	Sept. 19, 2022 Order/Opinion 2022 WL 4365745

show / hide documents

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/18741266/project-for-privacy-and-surveillance-accountability-inc-v-united-states/

Last updated Dec. 16, 2025, 3:43 a.m.

ECF Number	Description	Date	Link Date / Link
1	COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ADCDC-7954972) filed by PROJECT FOR PRIVACY AND SURVEILLANCE ACCOUNTABILITY, INC.. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit C, # 5 Exhibit D, # 6 Exhibit E, # 7 Exhibit F, # 8 Exhibit G, # 9 Exhibit H, # 10 Exhibit I, # 11 Exhibit J, # 12 Exhibit K, # 13 Exhibit L, # 14 Exhibit M, # 15 Exhibit N, # 16 Exhibit O, # 17 Exhibit P, # 18 Exhibit Q, # 19 Exhibit R, # 20 Exhibit S, # 21 Exhibit T, # 22 Exhibit U, # 23 Exhibit V, # 24 Exhibit W, # 25 Exhibit X, # 26 Exhibit Y, # 27 Exhibit Z, # 28 Summons U.S. Attorney General, # 29 Summons U.S. Attorney for D.C., # 30 Summons U.S. Department of Justice, # 31 Summons Office of the Director of National Intelligence, # 32 Summons National Security Agency, # 33 Summons Central Intelligence Agency, # 34 Summons U.S. Department of State)(Schaerr, Gene) (Entered: 12/14/2020) 1 Civil Cover Sheet View on PACER 2 Exhibit A View on PACER 3 Exhibit B View on PACER 4 Exhibit C View on PACER 5 Exhibit D View on PACER 6 Exhibit E View on PACER 7 Exhibit F View on PACER 8 Exhibit G View on RECAP 9 Exhibit H View on PACER 10 Exhibit I View on PACER 11 Exhibit J View on PACER 12 Exhibit K View on PACER 13 Exhibit L View on PACER 14 Exhibit M View on PACER 15 Exhibit N View on PACER 16 Exhibit O View on PACER 17 Exhibit P View on PACER 18 Exhibit Q View on PACER 19 Exhibit R View on PACER 20 Exhibit S View on PACER 21 Exhibit T View on PACER 22 Exhibit U View on PACER 23 Exhibit V View on PACER 24 Exhibit W View on PACER 25 Exhibit X View on PACER 26 Exhibit Y View on PACER 27 Exhibit Z View on PACER 28 Summons U.S. Attorney General View on PACER 29 Summons U.S. Attorney for D.C. View on PACER 30 Summons U.S. Department of Justice View on PACER 31 Summons Office of the Director of National Intelligence View on PACER 32 Summons National Security Agency View on PACER 33 Summons Central Intelligence Agency View on PACER 34 Summons U.S. Department of State View on PACER	Dec. 14, 2020	Dec. 14, 2020 Clearinghouse
2	ERRATA Complaint by PROJECT FOR PRIVACY AND SURVEILLANCE ACCOUNTABILITY, INC. 1 Complaint,,, filed by PROJECT FOR PRIVACY AND SURVEILLANCE ACCOUNTABILITY, INC.. (Schaerr, Gene) (Entered: 12/14/2020)	Dec. 14, 2020	Dec. 14, 2020
	NOTICE OF ERROR re 1 Complaint; emailed to gschaerr@schaerr-jaffe.com, cc'd 0 associated attorneys -- The PDF file you docketed contained errors: 1. No signature. Please file the signed document using the event Errata. All filings must have an original signature or '/s/ Attorney Name' to represent an electronic signature of the filer. (adh, )	Dec. 14, 2020	Dec. 14, 2020
	Case Assigned to Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell. (zsb)	Dec. 14, 2020	Dec. 14, 2020
	Notice of QC- New Case	Dec. 14, 2020	Dec. 14, 2020
	Case Assigned/Reassigned	Dec. 14, 2020	Dec. 14, 2020
3	STANDING ORDER. Signed by Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell on December 15, 2020. (lcbah3) (Entered: 12/15/2020)	Dec. 15, 2020	Dec. 15, 2020
4	SUMMONS (7) Issued Electronically as to CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (Attachment: # 1 Notice and Consent)(adh, ) (Entered: 12/16/2020)	Dec. 16, 2020	Dec. 16, 2020
5	Civil Statement	April 1, 2021	April 1, 2021
6	Summons Returned Executed as to Federal Defendant	April 1, 2021	April 1, 2021
7	Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to Answer or Otherwise Respond to Complaint by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Simon, Jeremy) (Entered: 04/06/2021)	April 6, 2021	April 6, 2021
	MINUTE ORDER (paperless) GRANTING the defendants' 7 Consent Motion for Extension of Time to Answer or Otherwise Respond to the Complaint and DIRECTING defendants to file an answer or otherwise respond to plaintiff's 1 Complaint by May 10, 2021. Signed by Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell on April 21, 2021. (lcbah3)	April 21, 2021	April 21, 2021
	Order on Motion for Extension of Time to	April 21, 2021	April 21, 2021
	Set/Reset Deadlines: Answer to the Complaint due by 5/10/2021. (ztg)	April 22, 2021	April 22, 2021
	Set/Reset Deadlines	April 22, 2021	April 22, 2021
8	ANSWER to Complaint by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE.(Simon, Jeremy) (Entered: 05/10/2021)	May 10, 2021	May 10, 2021
9	Joint STATUS REPORT by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE. (Simon, Jeremy) (Entered: 05/24/2021)	May 24, 2021	May 24, 2021
	MINUTE ORDER (paperless) ISSUING, in light of the parties' 9 Joint Status Report, the following SCHEDULING ORDER to control the timing of further proceedings in this matter: (1) by July 29, 2021, the defendants shall file their motion for summary judgment; (2) by September 7, 2021, the plaintiff shall file its combined opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment; (3) by October 5, 2021, the defendants shall file their combined opposition and reply; and (4) by November 4, 2021, the plaintiff shall file its reply. Signed by Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell on May 24, 2021. (lcbah3)	May 24, 2021	May 24, 2021
	.Order	May 24, 2021	May 24, 2021
	Set/Reset Deadlines: Summary judgment motion due by 7/29/2021; cross-motion and opposition to motion for summary judgment due by 9/7/2021; opposition to cross-motion and reply to opposition to motion for summary judgment due by 10/5/2021; reply to opposition to cross-motion due by 11/4/2021. (ztg)	May 25, 2021	May 25, 2021
	Set/Reset Deadlines	May 25, 2021	May 25, 2021
10	Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Motion for Summary Judgment and for a Corresponding Adjustment of the Remaining Deadlines in the Briefing Schedule by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Simon, Jeremy) (Entered: 07/26/2021)	July 26, 2021	July 26, 2021
	MINUTE ORDER (paperless) MODIFYING, upon consideration of defendants' 10 Consent Motion for Extension of Time to File Motion for Summary Judgment and for a Corresponding Adjustment to the Remaining Deadlines in the Briefing Schedule, the Court's May 24, 2021 SCHEDULING ORDER as follows: (1) by September 1, 2021, the defendants shall file their motion for summary judgment; (2) by October 11, 2021, the plaintiff shall file its combined opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment; (3) by November 8, 2021, the defendants shall file their combined opposition and reply; and (4) by December 8, 2021, the plaintiff shall file its reply. Signed by Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell on July 28, 2021. (lcbah3)	July 28, 2021	July 28, 2021
	Set/Reset Deadlines: Summary Judgment motion due by 9/1/2021; cross-motion and opposition to motion for summary judgment due by 10/11/2021; opposition to cross-motion and reply to opposition to motion for summary judgment due by 11/8/2021; reply to opposition to cross-motion due by 12/8/2021. (ztg)	July 28, 2021	July 28, 2021
	Order on Motion for Extension of Time to	July 28, 2021	July 28, 2021
	Set/Reset Deadlines	July 28, 2021	July 28, 2021
11	MOTION for Summary Judgment, Local Rule 7(h) Statement and Supporting Memorandum by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Declaration of Linda M. Kiyosaki, # 3 Declaration of Vanna Blaine, # 4 Declaration of Michael G. Seidel, # 5 Declaration of Patrick N. Findlay, # 6 Declaration of Victor Raphael, # 7 Declaration of Gregory M. Koch)(Simon, Jeremy) (Entered: 09/01/2021)	Sept. 1, 2021	Sept. 1, 2021
12	Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Pltfs Opp & Cross-Mot for SJ & Adj Rem Deadlines by PROJECT FOR PRIVACY AND SURVEILLANCE ACCOUNTABILITY, INC.. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Schaerr, Gene) (Entered: 10/05/2021)	Oct. 5, 2021	Oct. 5, 2021
	MINUTE ORDER (paperless) GRANTING plaintiff's 12 Consent Motion for Extension of Time to File Plaintiff's Opposition and Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment and Corresponding Adjustments to Remaining Deadlines and MODIFYING the scheduling order issued May 24, 2021, as follows: (1) by November 10, 2021, plaintiff shall file its cross-motion for summary judgment and opposition to defendant's 11 Motion for Summary Judgment; (2) by December 9, 2021, defendants shall file their opposition to plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment and reply in support of defendants' motion for summary judgment; and (3) by January 10, 2022, plaintiff shall file its reply in support of its cross-motion for summary judgment. Signed by Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell on October 5, 2021. (lcbah3)	Oct. 5, 2021	Oct. 5, 2021
	Set/Reset Deadlines: Plaintiff's cross-motion and opposition to the motion for summary judgment due by 11/10/2021. Defendant's opposition to plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment and reply in support of defendants' motion for summary judgment due by 12/9/2021. Plaintiff's reply in support of its cross-motion for summary judgment due by 1/10/2022.(hmc)	Oct. 5, 2021	Oct. 5, 2021
	Order on Motion for Extension of Time to	Oct. 5, 2021	Oct. 5, 2021
	Set/Reset Deadlines	Oct. 5, 2021	Oct. 5, 2021
13	NOTICE of Appearance by Brian J. Field on behalf of All Plaintiffs (Field, Brian) (Entered: 11/09/2021)	Nov. 9, 2021	Nov. 9, 2021
14	Memorandum in opposition to re 11 MOTION for Summary Judgment, Local Rule 7(h) Statement and Supporting Memorandum with Local Rule 7(h) Statement and Supporting Memorandum filed by PROJECT FOR PRIVACY AND SURVEILLANCE ACCOUNTABILITY, INC.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1-1992 Memo, # 2 Exhibit 2-2013 Memo, # 3 Exhibit 3-The Release, # 4 Exhibit 4-2017 Annex, # 5 Exhibit 5-ICD 112, # 6 Exhibit 6-IG Report, # 7 Exhibit 7-CIA Memo, # 8 Exhibit 8-Grenell Disclosure, # 9 Exhibit 9-Grenell Letter, # 10 Text of Proposed Order)(Schaerr, Gene) (Entered: 11/10/2021)	Nov. 10, 2021	Nov. 10, 2021
15	Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment with Local Rule 7(h) Statement and Supporting Memorandum by PROJECT FOR PRIVACY AND SURVEILLANCE ACCOUNTABILITY, INC.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1-1992 Memo, # 2 Exhibit 2-2013 Memo, # 3 Exhibit 3-The Release, # 4 Exhibit 4-2017 Annex, # 5 Exhibit 5-ICD 112, # 6 Exhibit 6-IG Report, # 7 Exhibit 7-CIA Memo, # 8 Exhibit 8-Grenell Disclosure, # 9 Exhibit 9-Grenell Letter, # 10 Text of Proposed Order)(Schaerr, Gene) (Entered: 11/10/2021)	Nov. 10, 2021	Nov. 10, 2021
16	Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Reply and Opposition and for Corresponding Adjustment of Remaining Deadline in Briefing Schedule by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Simon, Jeremy) (Entered: 12/01/2021)	Dec. 1, 2021	Dec. 1, 2021
	MINUTE ORDER (paperless) GRANTING defendants' 16 Consent Motion for Extension of Time to File Opposition and Reply and for a Corresponding Adjustment to the Remaining Deadline in the Briefing Schedule, and MODIFYING the scheduling order issued May 24, 2021, as follows: (1) by January 13, 2022, defendants shall file their opposition to plaintiff's 15 cross-motion for summary judgment and reply in support of defendants' 11 motion for summary judgment; and by February 15, 2022, plaintiff shall file its reply in support of its cross-motion for summary judgment. Signed by Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell on December 2, 2021. (lcbah3)	Dec. 2, 2021	Dec. 2, 2021
	Order on Motion for Extension of Time to	Dec. 2, 2021	Dec. 2, 2021
	Set/Reset Deadlines: Opposition to Cross Motion and reply to opposition to motion for summary judgement due by 1/13/2022; reply to opposition to cross-motion due by 2/15/2022. (ztg)	Dec. 3, 2021	Dec. 3, 2021
	Set/Reset Deadlines	Dec. 3, 2021	Dec. 3, 2021
17	Memorandum in opposition to re 15 Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment with Local Rule 7(h) Statement and Supporting Memorandum filed by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Supplemental Declaration of Michael Seidel)(Simon, Jeremy) (Entered: 01/13/2022)	Jan. 13, 2022	Jan. 13, 2022
18	REPLY to opposition to motion re 11 MOTION for Summary Judgment, Local Rule 7(h) Statement and Supporting Memorandum (duplicate of docket entry number 17) filed by CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Supplemental Declaration of Michael Seidel)(Simon, Jeremy) (Entered: 01/13/2022)	Jan. 13, 2022	Jan. 13, 2022
19	Consent MOTION for Leave to File Supplemental Findlay Declaration by UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Supplemental Findlay Declaration)(Simon, Jeremy) (Entered: 02/04/2022)	Feb. 4, 2022	Feb. 4, 2022
20	Supplemental DECLARATION by UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE re 11 MOTION for Summary Judgment, Local Rule 7(h) Statement and Supporting Memorandum filed by OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE. (zeg) (Entered: 02/11/2022)	Feb. 8, 2022	Feb. 8, 2022
	MINUTE ORDER (paperless) GRANTING defendants' 19 Consent Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Findlay Declaration, and DIRECTING the Clerk of Court to docket the [19-2] Supplemental Declaration of Patrick N. Findlay, attached to defendants' 19 Motion, in support of 11 Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell on February 8, 2022. (lcbah3)	Feb. 8, 2022	Feb. 8, 2022
	Order on Motion for Leave to File	Feb. 8, 2022	Feb. 8, 2022
21	REPLY to opposition to motion re 15 Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment, and in Support of Cross Motion for Summary Judgment filed by PROJECT FOR PRIVACY AND SURVEILLANCE ACCOUNTABILITY, INC.. (Schaerr, Gene) Modified docket link on 2/17/2022 (zeg). (Entered: 02/15/2022)	Feb. 15, 2022	Feb. 15, 2022
22	ORDER GRANTING defendants' 11 Motion for Summary Judgment and DENYING plaintiff's 15 Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. See Order for further details. Signed by Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell on September 19, 2022. (lcbah3) (Entered: 09/19/2022)	Sept. 19, 2022	Sept. 19, 2022
23	MEMORANDUM OPINION regarding defendants' 11 Motion for Summary Judgment and plaintiff's 15 Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell on September 19, 2022. (lcbah3) Modified to correct document type on 9/21/2022 (ztg). (Entered: 09/19/2022)	Sept. 19, 2022	Sept. 19, 2022 Clearinghouse
24	NOTICE OF APPEAL TO DC CIRCUIT COURT as to 22 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment, 23 Order on Motion for Summary Judgment, by PROJECT FOR PRIVACY AND SURVEILLANCE ACCOUNTABILITY, INC.. Filing fee $ 505, receipt number ADCDC-9683357. Fee Status: Fee Paid. Parties have been notified. (Schaerr, Gene) (Entered: 11/18/2022)	Nov. 18, 2022	Nov. 18, 2022
25	Transmission of the Notice of Appeal, Order Appealed (Memorandum Opinion), and Docket Sheet to US Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals fee was paid re 24 Notice of Appeal to DC Circuit Court. (zed) (Entered: 11/21/2022)	Nov. 21, 2022	Nov. 21, 2022
	USCA Case Number 22-5303 for 24 Notice of Appeal to DC Circuit Court, filed by PROJECT FOR PRIVACY AND SURVEILLANCE ACCOUNTABILITY, INC.. (zed)	Nov. 21, 2022	Nov. 21, 2022
	USCA Case Number	Nov. 23, 2022	Nov. 23, 2022
26	USCA Mandate	Sept. 15, 2025	Sept. 15, 2025