Rein v. United States Patent & Trademark Office

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that intra-agency communications about information given to agency’s counsel for litigation involving agency were privileged
• holding that efforts to correct an omission discovered after a FOIA action was filed did not “render[] the entire search suspect” and instead demonstrated the agency’s “good faith in conducting a thorough search to comply with FOIA”
• explaining that agency claiming exemptions from disclosure must provide district court with sufficient information to permit meaningful review
• noting that an agency may revise its Vaughn index to correct any identified deficiencies to satisfy its burden for withholding documents under FOIA
• finding that agency’s decision to use date of prior similar requests as starting point for new similar request “not inherently unreasonable” and “a practical common-sense approach”
• stating that the agency “bear[s] the burden of providing sufficient factual information as to the document’s nature or content from which the district court can independently assess the applicability of the claimed exemption”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).