UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
March 26, 2008
BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP, PLAINTIFF,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: James Robertson United States District Judge
This Freedom of Information Act case was remanded by the Court of Appeals for determination of whether any additional information concerning 50 sets of notes taken by Department of Commerce officials must be released in light of the meeting memorialization requirements of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. § 1202 et seq. Cross-motions for summary judgment were then filed, but plaintiff has withdrawn its motion.
The Department of Commerce initially argued that, by its previous document disclosures and the filing of three Vaughn indexes, it had already provided "all available information for all meetings or conversations identified in the notes at issue, without regard to whether those communications were required to be memorialized under the Tariff Act." [Dkt. 95 at 4]. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment focused solely on three documents (00A 1010, 00C 1040, and 00C 1042), as to which it asserted that the defendant had not disclosed the meeting participants and/or topics discussed. In response, Commerce submitted the declaration of Tim Truman, an Import Policy Specialist, who personally reviewed the three documents. [Dkt. 99, Ex. 1]. Mr. Truman explained that information regarding meeting participants had already been disclosed to the extent that it was reflected in the notes. Id. at ¶ 2. The topics discussed during four meetings had not been previously disclosed, but Mr. Truman explained what those topics were in his declaration. Id. at ¶¶ 3-6. After these additional disclosures, plaintiff does not seek further information pursuant to FOIA. The defendant's motion for summary judgment will accordingly be granted.
An appropriate order accompanies this memorandum.
© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.