In Row Over Cozen's FOIA Request for Cuban Business Licenses, Judge Orders Feds to Search Harder
A federal judge sided with Cozen O'Connor in its claim that a Treasury Department subdivision didn't search thoroughly for documents related to licenses to do business in Cuba sought in the firm's Freedom of Information Act request.
December 01, 2017 at 01:24 PM
10 minute read
A federal judge sided with Cozen O'Connor in its claim that a Treasury Department subdivision didn't search thoroughly for documents related to licenses to do business in Cuba sought in the firm's Freedom of Information Act request.
U.S. District Judge Jan E. DuBois of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania ordered the Office of Foreign Assets Control to look more closely in its records for the requested documents, including any records detailing the government's procedures for granting licenses to people and entities to conduct business in Cuba.
The firm alleged that the OFAC limited its search to its licensing department, despite the agency's admission that the requested documents could be in the possession of other departments.
“In this case, defendant has failed to explain why it limited its search to the licensing division, when the agency's own declaration shows that documents in the possession of other divisions 'may be relevant,'” DuBois wrote in his opinion. “Viewing the record in the light most favorable to defendant, the court concludes that there is no genuine issue of material fact that the scope [of] defendant's search was inadequate.”
Hayes Hunt, the Cozen O'Connor attorney on the case, did not return a call or respond to an email seeking comment. The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, which represented the OFAC in the case, did not respond to a request for comment.
Cozen O'Connor also argued that the agency used inadequate search terms in its efforts to retrieve the documents. The court concurred.
“In addition to OFAC's search for the terms 'Cuba,' 'policy,' 'procedure,' 'licensing policy,' and 'licensing procedure,' plaintiff argues that defendant should have used additional terms such as 'guidelines,' 'directions,' 'instructions,' or 'guidance.' This court agrees that the search terms used by defendant were inadequate, although for different reasons than plaintiff provides,” DuBois said.
The judge reasoned that the agency's efforts did not adequately address the third component of Cozen O'Connor's FOIA request: criteria that the OFAC uses to grant licenses to applicants.
“Defendant's search terms instead focus only on plaintiff's first two requests covering defendant's procedures and policies for reviewing applications,” DuBois said. “Consequently, the court concludes that, viewed in the light most favorable to defendant, the record leaves no genuine issue of material fact that the search terms used by the defendant were inadequate.”
DuBois summed up the case, noting, “Taken as whole, the record in this case—including the scope of defendant's search, the terms used in that search, and the indications of overlooked materials—shows there is no genuine issue of material fact that defendant's search was inadequate. Defendant failed to search beyond a single division or use search terms responsive to each of plaintiff's requests, and the 'positive indications of overlooked materials' support plaintiff's contention that defendant's search was inadequate.”
A federal judge sided with
U.S. District Judge
The firm alleged that the OFAC limited its search to its licensing department, despite the agency's admission that the requested documents could be in the possession of other departments.
“In this case, defendant has failed to explain why it limited its search to the licensing division, when the agency's own declaration shows that documents in the possession of other divisions 'may be relevant,'” DuBois wrote in his opinion. “Viewing the record in the light most favorable to defendant, the court concludes that there is no genuine issue of material fact that the scope [of] defendant's search was inadequate.”
Hayes Hunt, the
“In addition to OFAC's search for the terms 'Cuba,' 'policy,' 'procedure,' 'licensing policy,' and 'licensing procedure,' plaintiff argues that defendant should have used additional terms such as 'guidelines,' 'directions,' 'instructions,' or 'guidance.' This court agrees that the search terms used by defendant were inadequate, although for different reasons than plaintiff provides,” DuBois said.
The judge reasoned that the agency's efforts did not adequately address the third component of
“Defendant's search terms instead focus only on plaintiff's first two requests covering defendant's procedures and policies for reviewing applications,” DuBois said. “Consequently, the court concludes that, viewed in the light most favorable to defendant, the record leaves no genuine issue of material fact that the search terms used by the defendant were inadequate.”
DuBois summed up the case, noting, “Taken as whole, the record in this case—including the scope of defendant's search, the terms used in that search, and the indications of overlooked materials—shows there is no genuine issue of material fact that defendant's search was inadequate. Defendant failed to search beyond a single division or use search terms responsive to each of plaintiff's requests, and the 'positive indications of overlooked materials' support plaintiff's contention that defendant's search was inadequate.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPhila. Med Mal Lawyers In for Busy Year as Court Adjusts for Filing Boom
3 minute read'Recover, Reflect, Retool and Retry': Lessons From Women Atop Pa. Legal Community
3 minute readEDPA's New Chief Judge Plans to Advance Efforts to Combat Threats to Judiciary
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250