Conservation Force v. Jewell

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• applying Pub. Citizen Health Research Grp. v. Young, 909 F.2d 546, 550 (D.C. Cir. 1990) to the FOIA context
• finding no hard evidence “or other facts in the instant record indicat[ing] that [d]efendants only produced the[] documents because of [plaintiff’s] lawsuit”
• no causation where agency released documents after lawsuit was filed but agency adhered to its first-in, first-out procedure
• “[T]he question is whether hard evidence—beyond temporal proximity—supports the inference that the plaintiff's lawsuit caused the document release or other requested relief.”
• “Ultimately, it is the plaintiff’s burden to show that the catalyst pathway applies; if nothing else, this at least means that equipoise on the question of causation will not do.” (citations omitted)
• “New arguments made in a reply brief are forfeited.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).