SCIACCA v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION et al, No. 1:2008cv02030 - Document 41 (D.D.C. 2014)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION granting 39 Defendant's Second Motion for Summary Judgment and entering judgment in favor of Defendants. See attached document for details. Signed by Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson on 10/2/2014. (lckbj1)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
SCIACCA v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION et al Doc. 41 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ANTHONY SCIACCA, Plaintiff, v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 08-cv-2030 (KBJ)(JMF) MEMORANDUM OPINION In November of 2008, plaintiff Anthony Sciacca ( Sciacca ) filed the instant pro se complaint against the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Justice, and DOJ s Office of Information and Privacy (collectively, Defendants ), alleging that Defendants mishandled a document request that Sciacca submitted in 2006, pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. ยง 552, ( FOIA ). (See generally Complaint, ECF No. 1.) Defendants previously filed a motion for summary judgment, which the Court denied without prejudice on March 6, 2014, finding that Defendants have not provided sufficient information to permit an assessment of whether they have produced all reasonably segregable information, and have also failed to submit a sufficiently detailed affidavit, declaration, or Vaughn index in support of Defendants contention that they have satisfied their FOIA obligations. (Mem. Op., ECF No. 8, at 21.) This Court also authorized Defendants to refile their motion [o]nce they have provided supplemental declaration, or a Vaughn index, in a manner consistent with this opinion. (Id.) Dockets.Justia.com On June 6, 2014, Defendants filed a renewed motion for summary judgment in which they again argue that certain records responsive to Sciacca s FOIA request have been properly withheld under various exemptions to the FOIA. (See Mem. in Supp. of Defs. Second [] Mot. for Summ J., ECF No. 39-1.). As instructed, Defendants attached to this motion a supplemental declaration and a revised Vaughn index. (See Third Decl. of David M. Hardy and exhibits thereto, ECF Nos. 39-4, 39-5, 39-6, 39-7.) The Court advised Plaintiff of his obligations under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the local rules of this Court to respond to the motion, and specifically warned Plaintiff that, if he did not respond to the motion by July 21, 2014, the Court could treat the motion as conceded. (Order, ECF No. 40, at 1-2). To date, Sciacca has neither filed an opposition to the motion, nor requested more time to file his opposition. The Court, therefore, will GRANT the United States motion as conceded and will enter judgment in favor of Defendants. An Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion. Date: October 2, 2014 Ketanji Brown Jackson KETANJI BROWN JACKSON United States District Judge
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
