Case: American Oversight v. U.S. Department of Government Efficiency

1:25-cv-00409 | U.S. District Court for the District of District of Columbia

Filed Date: Feb. 11, 2025

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This is a Freedom of Information Act case against the "Department of Government Efficiency" and the Office of Management and Budget seeking communications involving Elon Musk and his key staff. This case concerns a legal battle over government transparency and access to public records. On February 11, 2025, American Oversight, a nonpartisan nonprofit committed to promoting transparency in government, filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Government Efficiency, the U.S. DOGE Service, th…

This is a Freedom of Information Act case against the "Department of Government Efficiency" and the Office of Management and Budget seeking communications involving Elon Musk and his key staff.

This case concerns a legal battle over government transparency and access to public records. On February 11, 2025, American Oversight, a nonpartisan nonprofit committed to promoting transparency in government, filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Government Efficiency, the U.S. DOGE Service, the U.S. DOGE Service Temporary Organization, the U.S. Digital Service, and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The lawsuit, brought under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552, and the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202, seeks to compel the defendants to produce records related to communications involving Elon Musk and his key staff. American Oversight is represented by in-house counsel, including Elizabeth Haddix and David Kronig.

In November 2024, following the U.S. presidential election, then-President-elect Donald Trump announced that Elon Musk would lead a newly formed entity, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). The purpose of this department was initially unclear, with concerns about whether it functioned as a government agency or a private advisory group. On January 20, 2025, Trump issued Executive Order No. 14158, which formally established DOGE and restructured the U.S. Digital Service (USDS) into the U.S. DOGE Service. This order also created a temporary organization within USDS tasked with implementing the administration’s technology and efficiency agenda over the next 18 months. Despite being classified as a government agency under 5 U.S.C. § 552(f)(1), DOGE’s operations were allegedly shrouded in secrecy. Reports surfaced that DOGE officials, including Musk, had gained access to sensitive government systems, engaged in policy decision-making, and issued direct orders to federal employees, raising concerns about executive overreach and unauthorized influence.

On January 30, 2025, American Oversight submitted two FOIA requests to the U.S. DOGE Service and OMB: IG Key Terms Request (Tracking No. OMB-25-0252) – Seeking internal communications related to the sudden removal of inspectors general from 17 federal agencies. IG Communications Request (Tracking No. OMB-25-0253) – Requesting records of communications between DOGE officials and members of Congress regarding these firings.

American Oversight’s complaint alleged that the abrupt terminations of inspectors general across multiple federal agencies raised serious concerns about government integrity and potential misconduct. In response, the organization submitted FOIA requests seeking records related to these dismissals and requested expedited processing under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E)(i). Despite the statutory requirement for a prompt response, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) acknowledged receipt of the requests on January 31, 2025, but failed to issue a determination within the required timeframe. Meanwhile, between January and early February 2025, officials from the newly established Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) were reported to have gained unauthorized access to at least 15 federal agencies, including USAID and the Treasury Department. DOGE personnel allegedly froze funding and reduced staffing at USAID, prompting Judge Carl Nichols to issue a temporary injunction on February 7, 2025 (Am. Foreign Service Assoc. v. Trump, 25-cv-352, ECF No. 15). The group also reportedly accessed the Treasury Department’s financial systems, leading to an emergency injunction by Judge Paul Engelmayer, and took control of human resources and financial operations at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), raising concerns that it was systematically dismantling regulatory agencies. Further compounding transparency concerns, DOGE officials allegedly used encrypted and ephemeral messaging platforms like Signal and Slack, potentially in violation of federal record-keeping laws. In response to these developments, on January 22, 2025, American Oversight sent a formal preservation letter to Elon Musk, reminding him of DOGE’s legal obligations under the Federal Records Act. The complaint alleges that the defendants’ failure to process the FOIA requests in a timely manner violated FOIA regulations.

Through this complaint, American Oversight sought a court order compelling the defendants to expedite processing, a declaratory judgment affirming that the requested records must be disclosed, and injunctive relief to ensure FOIA compliance. Additionally, the plaintiff requests attorneys’ fees and litigation costs under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(E).

On March 5, 2025, plaintiffs submitted an amended complaint adding three FOIA requests from February 2025 concerning DOGE deployments, messaging apps, and command structure. It also updated the factual background to include subsequent agency actions, thereby expanding the alleged FOIA violations and clarifying the requested relief.

That same day, Judge Beryl A. Howell issued a Standing Order in American Oversight v. U.S. Department of Government Efficiency, et al., Civil Action No. 25-409 (BAH), pending in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The order outlines procedural requirements for case management, including deadlines for filings, discovery procedures, and motion practices. It mandates the submission of a Joint Meet and Confer Report within 14 days of the defendants’ answer and sets specific rules for handling FOIA cases, emphasizing judicial efficiency and compliance with procedural obligations. This order signals that the case is actively progressing through its pretrial stages.

On April 2, 2025, the court granted American Oversight’s Motion for a Preservation Order, compelling DOGE, its sub-entities, and OMB to preserve all records responsive to the FOIA requests and disclose whether such records had been preserved to date. The court cited concerns that DOGE operated with unusual secrecy, may not have issued adequate litigation holds, and that many DOGE staff were unfamiliar with federal records retention obligations. The court found that a preservation order was necessary to ensure compliance with both the FOIA and the Presidential Records Act, especially given DOGE’s use of ephemeral communications systems and its refusal to stipulate to record preservation obligations.

Defendants responded to the amended complaint on April 21, 2025, and subsequently filed an amended answer on April 24. On June 2, plaintiffs moved for limited discovery to assess whether DOGE wielded independent authority sufficient to quality as an "agency" under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

The case remains ongoing.

show full summary

Summary Authors

Karma Karira (5/7/2025)

Emma Vayda (6/24/2025)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69630062/parties/american-oversight-v-us-department-of-government-efficiency/

Judge(s)

Howell, Beryl Alaine (District of Columbia)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Haddix, Elizabeth (District of Columbia)

Kronig, David (District of Columbia)

Attorney for Defendant

Bardo, John (District of Columbia)

Judge(s)

Howell, Beryl Alaine (District of Columbia)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Haddix, Elizabeth (District of Columbia)

Kronig, David (District of Columbia)

Attorney for Defendant

Bardo, John (District of Columbia)

Attorney Contact Information via CourtListener

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

	Document
1 1:25-cv-00409	Complaint	Feb. 11, 2025	Feb. 11, 2025 Complaint
6 1:25-cv-00409	Standing Order for Civil Cases American Oversight v. U.S. Department of Efficiency	March 5, 2025	March 5, 2025 Order/Opinion
5 1:25-cv-00409	First Amended Complaint	March 5, 2025	March 5, 2025 Complaint
5 1:25-cv-00409	First Amended Complaint	March 5, 2025	March 5, 2025 Complaint
21 1:25-cv-00409	Plaintiff's Motion for Limited Discovery and Incorporated Statement of Points and Authorities	June 2, 2025	June 2, 2025 Pleading / Motion / Brief

show / hide documents

Resources

Title	Description		External URL Date / External URL
EO 14158 - Establishing and Implementing the President's "Department of Government Efficiency" President Donald Trump	Establishing the Department of Government Efficiency to implement the President's DOGE Agenda, by modernizing Federal technology and software to maximize governmental efficiency and productivity.	Jan. 20, 2025	Jan. 20, 2025 https://www.federalregister.gov/...

show / hide resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69630062/american-oversight-v-us-department-of-government-efficiency/

Last updated Aug. 30, 2025, 2:17 a.m.

ECF Number	Description	Date	Link Date / Link
1	COMPLAINT by American Oversight against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 405 receipt number ADCDC-11473030) filed by American Oversight. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet cvr sheet, # 2 Summons USAO summons, # 3 Summons AG Summons, # 4 Summons DOGE Summons, # 5 Summons DOGE Service Summons, # 6 Summons DOGE Service Temp Org summons, # 7 Summons Digital Service summons, # 8 Summons OMB summons)(Haddix, Elizabeth) (Entered: 02/11/2025) 1 Civil Cover Sheet cvr sheet View on PACER 2 Summons USAO summons View on PACER 3 Summons AG Summons View on PACER 4 Summons DOGE Summons View on PACER 5 Summons DOGE Service Summons View on PACER 6 Summons DOGE Service Temp Org summons View on PACER 7 Summons Digital Service summons View on PACER 8 Summons OMB summons View on PACER	Feb. 11, 2025	Feb. 11, 2025 Clearinghouse
2	AFFIDAVIT re 1 Complaint, Exhibits A-D by American Oversight. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Compl Ex A, # 2 Exhibit Compl Ex B, # 3 Exhibit Compl Ex C, # 4 Exhibit Compl Ex D)(Haddix, Elizabeth) (Entered: 02/11/2025) 1 Exhibit Compl Ex A View on RECAP 2 Exhibit Compl Ex B View on PACER 3 Exhibit Compl Ex C View on PACER 4 Exhibit Compl Ex D View on PACER	Feb. 11, 2025	Feb. 11, 2025 RECAP
3	NOTICE of Appearance by David Kronig on behalf of American Oversight (Kronig, David) (Entered: 02/11/2025)	Feb. 11, 2025	Feb. 11, 2025 PACER
4	SUMMONS(7) Issued Electronically as to All Defendants, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (Attachments: # 1 Notice and Consent)(zmtm) (Entered: 02/13/2025)	Feb. 13, 2025	Feb. 13, 2025 PACER
	Case Assigned/Reassigned	Feb. 13, 2025	Feb. 13, 2025 PACER
	Case Assigned to Judge Beryl A. Howell. (zmtm)	Feb. 13, 2025	Feb. 13, 2025 PACER
5	AMENDED COMPLAINT against All Defendants filed by AMERICAN OVERSIGHT. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet cvr sheet, # 2 Summons USAO summons, # 3 Summons AG Summons, # 4 Summons DOGE Summons, # 5 Summons USDS summons, # 6 Summons DOGE Temp summons, # 7 Summons US Dig Serv Summons, # 8 Summons OMB summons, # 9 Exhibit Ex A, # 10 Exhibit Ex B, # 11 Exhibit Ex C, # 12 Exhibit Ex D, # 13 Exhibit Ex E, # 14 Exhibit Ex F, # 15 Exhibit Ex G, # 16 Exhibit Ex H, # 17 Exhibit Ex I, # 18 Exhibit Ex J, # 19 Exhibit Ex K, # 20 Exhibit Ex L, # 21 Exhibit Ex M, # 22 Exhibit Ex N, # 23 Exhibit Ex O, # 24 Exhibit Ex P)(Haddix, Elizabeth) (Entered: 03/05/2025) 1 Civil Cover Sheet cvr sheet View on PACER 2 Summons USAO summons View on PACER 3 Summons AG Summons View on PACER 4 Summons DOGE Summons View on PACER 5 Summons USDS summons View on PACER 6 Summons DOGE Temp summons View on PACER 7 Summons US Dig Serv Summons View on PACER 8 Summons OMB summons View on PACER 9 Exhibit Ex A View on PACER 10 Exhibit Ex B View on PACER 11 Exhibit Ex C View on PACER 12 Exhibit Ex D View on PACER 13 Exhibit Ex E View on PACER 14 Exhibit Ex F View on PACER 15 Exhibit Ex G View on PACER 16 Exhibit Ex H View on PACER 17 Exhibit Ex I View on PACER 18 Exhibit Ex J View on PACER 19 Exhibit Ex K View on PACER 20 Exhibit Ex L View on PACER 21 Exhibit Ex M View on PACER 22 Exhibit Ex N View on PACER 23 Exhibit Ex O View on PACER 24 Exhibit Ex P View on PACER	March 5, 2025	March 5, 2025 Clearinghouse
6	STANDING ORDER. Signed by Judge Beryl A. Howell on March 5, 2025. (lcbah1) (Entered: 03/05/2025)	March 5, 2025	March 5, 2025 Clearinghouse
7	RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed as to the United States Attorney. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney on 3/6/2025. Answer due for ALL FEDERAL DEFENDANTS by 4/5/2025. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Ex 1, # 2 Exhibit Ex 2, # 3 Exhibit Ex 2A, # 4 Exhibit Ex 3, # 5 Exhibit Ex 4, # 6 Exhibit Ex 5, # 7 Exhibit Ex 6, # 8 Exhibit Ex 7, # 9 Exhibit Ex 8, # 10 Exhibit Ex 9)(Haddix, Elizabeth) (Entered: 03/17/2025)	March 17, 2025	March 17, 2025 PACER
8	RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed on United States Attorney General. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney General 3/6/2025., RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET served on 3/6/2025; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY served on 3/6/2025; U.S. DIGITAL SERVICE served on 3/6/2025; U.S. DOGE SERVICE served on 3/6/2025; U.S. DOGE SERVICE TEMPORARY ORGANIZATION served on 3/6/2025. (See docket entry 7 to view document) (mg) (Entered: 03/20/2025)	March 17, 2025	March 17, 2025 PACER
9	MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to the Complaint by U.S. DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY, U.S. DOGE SERVICE, U.S. DOGE SERVICE TEMPORARY ORGANIZATION, U.S. DIGITAL SERVICE, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Bardo, John) (Entered: 03/20/2025)	March 20, 2025	March 20, 2025 PACER
	Summons Returned Executed as to Federal Defendant AND Summons Returned Executed as to U.S. Attorney General	March 20, 2025	March 20, 2025 PACER
	.Order	March 20, 2025	March 20, 2025 PACER
	MINUTE ORDER (paperless), upon consideration of defendants' 9 Motion for Extension of Time ("Defs.' Mot."), which states that plaintiff opposes the relief sought in the motion, id. at 1, DIRECTING plaintiff to file its opposition by 12:00 PM EST on March 21, 2025. Signed by Judge Beryl A. Howell on March 20, 2025. (lcbah1)	March 20, 2025	March 20, 2025 PACER
10	Memorandum in opposition to re 9 Motion for Extension of Time to, filed by AMERICAN OVERSIGHT. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Haddix Decl, # 2 Exhibit Ex 1, # 3 Exhibit Ex 2, # 4 Exhibit Ex 3)(Haddix, Elizabeth) (Entered: 03/21/2025) 1 Affidavit Haddix Decl View on RECAP 2 Exhibit Ex 1 View on PACER 3 Exhibit Ex 2 View on PACER 4 Exhibit Ex 3 View on PACER	March 21, 2025	March 21, 2025 PACER
11	NOTICE of Proposed Order by AMERICAN OVERSIGHT re 10 Memorandum in Opposition, filed by AMERICAN OVERSIGHT. (Haddix, Elizabeth) Modified event on 3/24/2025 (mg). (Entered: 03/21/2025)	March 21, 2025	March 21, 2025 RECAP
	Set/Reset Deadlines	March 21, 2025	March 21, 2025 PACER
	Set/Reset Deadlines: Plaintiff Opposition due no later than 12:00PM on 3/21/2025. (mac)	March 21, 2025	March 21, 2025 PACER
12	MOTION for Order for Preservation of Documents by AMERICAN OVERSIGHT. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Declaration Haddix Declaration, # 3 Exhibit Exhibit A to Haddix Decl., # 4 Text of Proposed Order)(Kronig, David) (Entered: 03/24/2025) 1 Memorandum in Support View on RECAP 2 Declaration Haddix Declaration View on PACER 3 Exhibit Exhibit A to Haddix Decl. View on RECAP 4 Text of Proposed Order View on PACER	March 24, 2025	March 24, 2025 RECAP
	.Order	March 25, 2025	March 25, 2025 PACER
	MINUTE ORDER (paperless), upon consideration of plaintiff's 12 Motion for a Preservation Order, DIRECTING defendants' to file any opposition by 12:00PM EST on March 27, 2025; and FURTHER DIRECTING plaintiff to file any reply in support of its motion by 12:00PM EST on March 28, 2025. Signed by Judge Beryl A. Howell on March 25, 2025. (lcbah1)	March 25, 2025	March 25, 2025 PACER
	Set/Reset Deadlines	March 26, 2025	March 26, 2025 PACER
	Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendants' Opposition To Plaintiff's Motion For A Preservation Order due no later than 12:00PM on 3/27/2025. Plaintiff Reply In Support Of Its Motion due no later than 12:00PM on 3/28/2025. (mac)	March 26, 2025	March 26, 2025 PACER
13	Memorandum in opposition to re 12 Motion for Order filed by U.S. DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY, U.S. DOGE SERVICE, U.S. DOGE SERVICE TEMPORARY ORGANIZATION, U.S. DIGITAL SERVICE, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order, # 2 Exhibit United States DOGE Service Records Retention Policy)(Bardo, John) (Entered: 03/27/2025) 1 Text of Proposed Order View on PACER 2 Exhibit United States DOGE Service Records Retention Policy View on RECAP	March 27, 2025	March 27, 2025 RECAP
14	REPLY to opposition to motion re 12 Motion for Order for Preservation of Records Responsive to FOIA requests filed by AMERICAN OVERSIGHT. (Haddix, Elizabeth) (Entered: 03/28/2025)	March 28, 2025	March 28, 2025 RECAP
15	PRESERVATION ORDER. Signed by Judge Beryl A. Howell on April 2, 2025. (lcbah1) (Entered: 04/02/2025)	April 2, 2025	April 2, 2025 RECAP
	Order on Motion for Extension of Time to	April 2, 2025	April 2, 2025 PACER
	Order on Motion for Order	April 2, 2025	April 2, 2025 PACER
	MINUTE ORDER (paperless) GRANTING plaintiff's American Oversight 12 Motion for a Preservation Order ("Pl.'s Mot.") over defendants' 13 opposition ("Defs.' Opp'n"). "Federal courts have the inherent power to issue orders preserving information relevant to the claims and defenses brought before them." United States ex rel. Staggers v. Medtronic, Inc., No. 1:15-CV-392-TSC-RMM, 2022 WL 4078969, at 2 (D.D.C. Sept. 6, 2022). Plaintiff asks that the Court exercise its inherent authority to issue a preservation order requiring defendants U.S. Department of Government Efficiency, U.S. DOGE Service, U.S. DOGE Service Temporary Organization, U.S. Digital Service (collectively, "DOGE"), (1) "to preserve all records responsive" to all eight of the requests, pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"), 5 U.S.C. §552, for records at issue in this case, and (2) "disclose whether all such records have been preserved to date." Pl.'s Mot. at 1. Such a preservation order is necessary, plaintiff contends, because "DOGE staff... have used non-governmental, ephemeral messaging systems such as Signal to communicate regarding official matters," id.; "DOGE's record-keeping practices suggest that it may, to date, have been unfamiliar with or indifferent to its preservation obligations," id. at 15; and "DOGE [has] refused to stipulate that it would preserve records responsive to [plaintiff's] requests," id. at 19. In response, defendants disclaim any need for a preservation order because "[DOGE] has already issued a litigation hold in light of plaintiff's complaint," Defs.' Opp'n at 1; "[DOGE] complies with its Presidential Records Act obligations," id.; and "[t]he presumption of Executive Branch officials' good faith require" denial of the motion, id. To the extent that defendants argue that it is not subject to FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552 et seq., those arguments go to the underlying merits, see Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington v. U.S. DOGE Service ("CREW"), No. 25-cv-511, 2025 WL 752367, at 10-13 (D.D.C. Mar. 10, 2025) (holding that DOGE is likely an agency subject to FOIA), rather than DOGE's obligations to preserve documents when litigation is reasonably anticipated or pending. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(e); Gerlich v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 711 F.3d 161, 170-71 (D.C. Cir. 2013) (holding that the duty to preserve begins "when a party should have known that the evidence may be relevant to future litigation" (emphasis in original)). Notwithstanding the fact that DOGE has issued a litigation hold, DOGE personnel "may not fully appreciate their obligations to preserve federal records," under either the FOIA or the Presidential Records Act, as "many of [the] staffers are reported to have joined the federal government only recently and... may not be steeped in its document retention policies," CREW, 2025 WL 752367, at 16-17 (D.D.C. Mar. 10, 2025), which, under FOIA, reaches even those government records stored on private devices, see generally Competitive Enter. Inst. v. Off. of Sci. & Tech. Pol'y, 827 F.3d 145 (D.C. Cir. 2016). Finally, while "the Court presumes that executive officials... act in good faith," "absent a court order punishable by contempt requiring the maintenance and preservation" of potentially responsive records, plaintiff "would have no recourse" were the records at issue not maintained and preserved pursuant only to a litigation hold letter. Citizens for Resp. & Ethics in Wash. v. Off. of Admin., 593 F. Supp. 2d 156, 162 (D.D.C. 2009). Additional concerns arise due to the fact that DOGE "operat[es] with unusual secrecy," which includes the use of "Signal, an encrypted messaging app with an auto-delete function," CREW, 2025 WL 752367, at 16, and has refused to stipulate to its preservation obligations of documents that are at the heart of this litigation, Pl.'s Mot. at 19. See also CREW, 2025 WL 752367, at *16 (noting that DOGE's lack of assurances of compliance with the Federal Records Act was evidence that a preservation order was necessary). Moreover, to the extent that DOGE insists that this entity's compliance with the Presidential Records Act ("PRA"), 44 U.S.C. § 2201 et seq., is sufficient compliance with preservation obligations in this case, Defs.' Opp'n at 1, only confirms plaintiff's concern about the need for a preservation order since the what qualifies as a record and the respective retention obligations differ between the PRA and the FOIA, see generally Armstrong v. Exec. Office of the President, 90 F.3d 553 (D.C. Cir. 1996), U.S. Dep't of Justice v. Tax Analysts, 492 U.S. 136 (1989). At the same time, DOGE's actual compliance with PRA record retention obligations mitigates any burden of DOGE also complying with obligations to preserve records at issue in this case and prevent spoilation of records and information during the pendency of this litigation.Accordingly, plaintiff's motion is GRANTED, and a preservation order will be entered contemporaneously. Signed by Judge Beryl A. Howell on April 2, 2025. (lcbah1)	April 2, 2025	April 2, 2025 PACER
	MINUTE ORDER (paperless) GRANTING defendants' 9 Motion for Extension of Time; and DIRECTING defendants to respond to plaintiff's 1 Complaint by April 21, 2025. Signed by Judge Beryl A. Howell on April 2, 2025. (lcbah1)	April 2, 2025	April 2, 2025 PACER
	Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendants Response To Plaintiff's Complaint due by 4/21/2025. (mac)	April 3, 2025	April 3, 2025 PACER
	Set/Reset Deadlines	April 3, 2025	April 3, 2025 PACER
	Set/Reset Deadlines: Defendants U.S. Department of Government Efficiency, U.S. DOGE Service, U.S. DOGE Service Temporary Organization, U.S. Digital Service (collectively, "DOGE") Notice To The Court due by 4/7/2025. (mac)	April 3, 2025	April 3, 2025 PACER
16	STATUS REPORT by OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY, U.S. DIGITAL SERVICE, U.S. DOGE SERVICE, U.S. DOGE SERVICE TEMPORARY ORGANIZATION. (Bardo, John) (Entered: 04/07/2025)	April 7, 2025	April 7, 2025 RECAP
17	STATUS REPORT Response by AMERICAN OVERSIGHT. (Haddix, Elizabeth) (Entered: 04/08/2025)	April 8, 2025	April 8, 2025 RECAP
18	ANSWER to 5 Amended Complaint,, by OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY, U.S. DIGITAL SERVICE, U.S. DOGE SERVICE, U.S. DOGE SERVICE TEMPORARY ORGANIZATION.(Bardo, John) (Entered: 04/21/2025)	April 21, 2025	April 21, 2025 RECAP
19	AMENDED ANSWER to Complaint Amended Answer to First Amended Complaint by OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY, U.S. DIGITAL SERVICE, U.S. DOGE SERVICE, U.S. DOGE SERVICE TEMPORARY ORGANIZATION. (Attachments: # 1 Errata Redline of ECF No. 18)(Bardo, John) Modified event title on 4/29/2025 (znmw). (Entered: 04/24/2025) 1 Errata Redline of ECF No. 18 View on PACER	April 24, 2025	April 24, 2025 RECAP
20	Joint STATUS REPORT by AMERICAN OVERSIGHT. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Plaintiff's Proposed Order)(Haddix, Elizabeth) (Entered: 05/05/2025) 1 Text of Proposed Order Plaintiff's Proposed Order View on RECAP	May 5, 2025	May 5, 2025 RECAP
	.Order	May 23, 2025	May 23, 2025 PACER
	MINUTE ORDER (paperless), upon consideration of the parties' 20 Joint Status Report ("JSR"), which states that the parties dispute whether plaintiff should be permitted limited discovery to determine whether defendants U.S. Department of Government Efficiency, U.S. DOGE Service, U.S. DOGE Service Temporary Organization, and U.S. Digital Service (collectively "DOGE") wield independent authority sufficient to be subject to the Freedom of Information Act, JSR at 2-5, ISSUING the following SCHEDULING ORDER:1. By June 2, 2025, plaintiff shall file a motion for expedited discovery of not more than 20 pages and attaching, as exhibits, proposed "properly scoped" requests. See Citizens for Resp. & Ethics in Wash. v. U.S. Doge Serv., 2025 WL 1392836, at *4 (D.D.C. Apr. 15, 2025) (emphasis added);2. By June 16, 2025, defendants shall file any opposition to plaintiff's motion and the scope of any proposed requests of not more than 20 pages; and3. By June 23, 2025, plaintiff shall file any reply. Signed by Judge Beryl A. Howell on May 23, 2025. (lcbah1)	May 23, 2025	May 23, 2025 PACER
	Set/Reset Deadlines	May 23, 2025	May 23, 2025 PACER
	Set/Reset Deadlines: Plaintiff Motion For Expedited Discovery due by 6/2/2025. Defendants Opposition To Plaintiff's Motion due by 6/16/2025. Plaintiff Reply due by 6/23/2025. (mac)	May 23, 2025	May 23, 2025 PACER
21	MOTION for Discovery by AMERICAN OVERSIGHT. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Ex 1, # 2 Exhibit Ex 2, # 3 Exhibit Ex 3, # 4 Exhibit Ex 4, # 5 Exhibit Ex 5, # 6 Text of Proposed Order Proposed order)(Haddix, Elizabeth) (Entered: 06/02/2025) 1 Exhibit Ex 1 View on PACER 2 Exhibit Ex 2 View on PACER 3 Exhibit Ex 3 View on PACER 4 Exhibit Ex 4 View on PACER 5 Exhibit Ex 5 View on PACER 6 Text of Proposed Order Proposed order View on PACER	June 2, 2025	June 2, 2025 Clearinghouse
22	Memorandum in opposition to re 21 MOTION for Discovery filed by U.S. DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY, U.S. DIGITAL SERVICE, U.S. DOGE SERVICE, U.S. DOGE SERVICE TEMPORARY ORGANIZATION. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Bardo, John) (Entered: 06/16/2025) 1 Text of Proposed Order View on PACER	June 16, 2025	June 16, 2025 PACER
23	REPLY to opposition to motion re 21 Motion for Discovery filed by AMERICAN OVERSIGHT. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Redlined Prop Discovery, # 2 Exhibit Revised Proposed Discovery Reqs)(Haddix, Elizabeth) (Entered: 06/23/2025) 1 Exhibit Redlined Prop Discovery View on PACER 2 Exhibit Revised Proposed Discovery Reqs View on PACER	June 23, 2025	June 23, 2025 PACER
	.Order	Aug. 20, 2025	Aug. 20, 2025 PACER
	Set/Reset Deadlines	Aug. 22, 2025	Aug. 22, 2025 PACER