Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Plaintiff,
and
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
Defendants.
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. and Local Rule 7(h), plaintiff The Protect Democracy Project,
Inc. (hereinafter “Protect Democracy”) hereby moves for summary judgment against Defendant
U.S. National Security Agency (“NSA”). As explained in more detail in the accompanying Statement
of Undisputed Material Facts and Memorandum of Points and Authorities in support of this
Motion, the parties negotiated a narrowed scope of the pending FOIA request solely for Defendant
NSA. Specifically, Plaintiff agreed to limit the scope of NSA’s search and production obligations to a
memorandum (and related documents) that, according to numerous news reports quoting multiple
current and former government officials, was written in March 2017 by senior NSA personnel after
the President of the United States called the Director of the NSA and asked him to publicly dispute
the notion that there was any collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia during the 2016
Presidential election.
1
Case 1:17-cv-01000-CKK Document 18 Filed 04/13/18 Page 2 of 2
NSA has now completed its search for responsive documents and claims, under Exemption
3 of the Freedom of Information Act and the “Glomar” doctrine, that it can neither confirm nor
deny the existence of any responsive records. Because neither the cited exemption nor Glomar
applies to this case, Plaintiff Protect Democracy is entitled to summary judgment on its claim against
the NSA.
Plaintiff does not, at this time, seek summary judgment against the other defendant agencies
in this case, who are still processing and producing responsive records under the schedule
Respectfully submitted,
Michael P. Abate
(DDC Bar No. MD28077)
(DC Bar No. 1023343)
Kaplan Johnson Abate & Bird LLP
710 W. Main St., 4th Floor
Louisville, KY 40202