District of Columbia· 9/11/2007
Moayedi v. US Customs and Border Protection
Citations
- 510 F. Supp. 2d 73
- 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66644
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- stating that “the FOIA requires that a request be made in accordance with the agency’s published FOIA rules”
- granting summary judgment where CBP’s supporting affidavit expressly stated that “TECS is the only CBP database that would reasonably contain the information requested in this FOIA request”
- “ ‘Low 2' materials . . . include . . . ‘trivial administrative data such as file numbers, mail routing stamps, initials, data processing notations, and other administrative markings’ ”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Reggie B. Walton
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
10 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Lewis v. Executive Office for United State AttorneysDistrict of Columbia· 2011-11-03· cited 33×
- Brown v. F.B.I.District of Columbia· 2009-12-28· cited 31×
- Shapiro v. Department of JusticeDistrict of Columbia· 2014-03-31· cited 24×
- ['Scudder v. Central Intelligence Agency']District of Columbia· 2014-03-12· cited 21×
- Concepcion v. US Customs and Border Protection DivisionDistrict of Columbia· 2011-03-03
- Clay v. United States Department of JusticeDistrict of Columbia· 2010-01-29
- Brown v. Federal Bureau of InvestigationDistrict of Columbia· 2009-12-28
- Moore v. Central Intelligence AgencyDistrict of Columbia· 2022-07-28
- Transgender Law Center v. United States Immigration & Customs EnforcementDistrict of Columbia· 2025-02-25
- Stonehill v. Central Intelligence AgencyDistrict of Columbia· 2025-08-18
Cites
40 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court· 1986-06-25· cited 135,235×
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court· 1986-06-25· cited 119,442×
- Robert G. Vaughn v. Bernard Rosen, Executive Director, United States Civil Service CommissionD.C. Circuit· 1973-10-18· cited 1,941×
- Safecard Services, Inc. v. Securities and Exchange CommissionD.C. Circuit· 1991-03-01· cited 1,840×
- Carl Oglesby v. The United States Department of the ArmyD.C. Circuit· 1990-12-04· cited 1,525×
- Military Audit Project, Felice D. Cohen, Morton H. Halperin v. William Casey, Director of Central IntelligenceD.C. Circuit· 1981-05-04· cited 1,309×
- Susan D. Goland and Patricia B. Skidmore v. Central Intelligence AgencyD.C. Circuit· 1978-05-23· cited 821×
- Harold Weisberg v. U.S. Department of Justice, (Two Cases). Harold Weisberg v. U.S. Department of Justice. (Two Cases)D.C. Circuit· 1984-10-05· cited 796×
- Valencia-Lucena v. United States Coast GuardD.C. Circuit· 1999-06-25· cited 765×
- Charles E. Perry v. John R. Block, Secretary of AgricultureD.C. Circuit· 1982-07-30· cited 759×
- Campbell v. United States Department of JusticeD.C. Circuit· 1998-12-29· cited 731×
- Weisberg v. U.S. Department of JusticeD.C. Circuit· 1983-04-05· cited 701×
- Michele Steinberg v. United States Department of JusticeD.C. Circuit· 1994-05-27· cited 596×
- Ground Saucer Watch, Inc., Harvey Brody v. Central Intelligence AgencyD.C. Circuit· 1981-08-17· cited 582×
- Marc Truitt v. Department of StateD.C. Circuit· 1990-05-10· cited 578×
- Lesar v. United States Department of JusticeD.C. Circuit· 1980-07-15· cited 435×
- Critical Mass Energy Project v. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionD.C. Circuit· 1992-08-21· cited 413×
- Michael Meeropol, A/K/A Rosenberg v. Edwin Meese Iii, Attorney General of the United StatesD.C. Circuit· 1986-05-28· cited 401×
- Hayden v. National Security Agency/Central Security ServiceD.C. Circuit· 1979-10-29· cited 394×
- The Founding Church of Scientology of Washington, D. C., Inc. v. National Security AgencyD.C. Circuit· 1979-05-15· cited 383×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.