Sack v. Central Intelligence Agency

How courts have described this case

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

• holding overbroad a request for “all records that ‘pertain[] in whole or in part,’” because this phrase “is difficult to define because a record may pertain to something without specifically mentioning it”
• noting that seeking “additional guidance from the [FOIA] requester and, when none was provided, clos[ing] the file” was “a reasonable path” when the requester failed to provide sufficient information regarding the records sought
• observing that requests seeking all documents \pertaining to\ a particular topic \lack [ ] clarity [and] leave[ ] the agency to guess at the plaintiff's intent\ because \a record may pertain to something without specifically mentioning it\
• observing that requests seeking all documents “pertaining to” a particular topic “lack [ ] clarity [and] leave[] the agency to guess at the plaintiff’s intent” because “a record may pertain to something without specifically mentioning it”
• granting summary judgment to the CIA on plaintiffs request for all “documents pertaining in whole or in part (all years, all classifications
• withholding photographs of Department of Defense employees and contractor personnel taken with thermal camera for training purposes

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).