Edmonds Institute v. United States Department of the Interior

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that FOIA precluded APA claim that agency “failed to respond to [the plaintiffs] FOIA requests within the twenty working dates required by statute”
• finding that FOIA precluded APA claim that agency “failed to respond to [the plaintiff’s] FOIA requests within the twenty working dates required by statute”
• holding that the plaintiff’s contention that the agency should “use[] the date the documents were released as the cut-off date . . . is inherently flawed, leading as it would to an ever- moving target for the production of documents under FOIA”
• finding that a plaintiff’s proposal of using a document release cut-off date was “inherently flawed, leading as it would to an ever-moving target for the production of documents under FOIA”
• finding FOIA provided adequate remedy and dismissing plaintiff’s claim under the APA that the agency failed to respond to FOIA requests within statutory timeline
• dismissing plaintiff’s APA claim that the agency failed to respond to FOIA requests within the prescribed timeline where FOIA provided an adequate remedy

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).