|Submitted||March 6, 2014|
MuckRock users can file, duplicate, track, and share public records requests like this one. Learn more.
To Whom It May Concern:
This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act. I hereby request the following records:
A record of communications, correspondence and investigations conducted into ex-parte communications and/or threats made against U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby after his ruling in Kitchen v. Herbert (Amendment 3) case.
I also request that, if appropriate, fees be waived as I believe this request is in the public interest. The requested documents will be made available to the general public free of charge as part of the public information service at MuckRock.com, processed by a representative of the news media/press and is made in the process of news gathering and not for commercial usage.
In the event that fees cannot be waived, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.
Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to receiving your response to this request within 20 business days, as the statute requires.
[USMS seal blue294 1in]
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Marshals Service
Office of General Counsel
2604 Jefferson Davis Hwy.
Alexandria, VA 22301
March 10, 2014
Department MR 10721
PO Box 55819
Boston, MA 02205-5819
Re: Freedom of Information Act Request No. 2014USMS25571
Subject: US District Court Judge Robert Shelby
The United States Marshals Service (USMS) is responding to your request for a record of communications, correspondence and investigations conducted into ex-parte communications and/or threats made against U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby after his ruling in Kitchen v. Herbert (Amendment 3) case.
The Marshals Service will neither confirm nor deny the existence of the records you seek. If such records exist within the records and files of the Marshals Service, they would be exempt from disclosure pursuant to exemption 7(C) of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b). Exemption 7(C) allows an agency to withhold records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes to the extent that disclosure could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. A discretionary release of such information, if it exists in the records of the USMS, would be in violation of the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. § 552a. See also United States Department of Justice v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749 (1989).
If you are dissatisfied with my action on this request, you may appeal by writing to the Director, Office of Information Policy, United States Department of Justice, Suite 11050, 1425 New York Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20530-0001. Your appeal must be received by OIP within 60 days of the date of this letter. Both the letter and the envelope should be clearly marked “Freedom of Information/ Privacy Act Appeal.” In the event you are dissatisfied with the results of any such appeal, judicial review will thereafter be available to you in the United States District Court for the judicial district in which you reside or have your principal place of business, or in the District of Columbia.
For your information, Congress excluded three discrete categories of law enforcement and national security records from the requirements of the FOIA. See 5 U.S.C. § 552(c ) (2006), & Supp. IV (2010). This response is limited to those records that are subject to the requirements of the FOIA. This is a standard notification that is given to all our requesters and should not be taken as an indication that excluded records do, or do not, exist.
William E. Bordley
Counsel/ FOI/PA Officer
Office of General Counsel
To whom it may concern,
This is an appeal for my request seeking a record of communications, correspondence and investigations conducted into ex-parte communications and/or threats made against U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby after his ruling in Kitchen v. Herbert (Amendment 3) case.
I understand that some information may be protected, but I am seeking either a redaction of some information or a record of ex-parte communications, which I believe would not be protected under FOIA.