Arias v. DynCorp
2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57980
D.D.C.2012Background
- Plaintiffs are citizens and domiciliaries of Ecuador alleging harm from DynCorp’s Plan Colombia spraying contract with the U.S. to eradicate drugs in Colombia.
- DynCorp contracted with DOS to spray herbicides; plaintiffs allege effects occurred in Ecuador along the border.
- Magistrate Judge Robinson denied production of non-spray flight-line data for lack of relevance; later, the court found the data relevant and ordered production under a protective order.
- Defendants moved for reconsideration of the April 30, 2010 ruling or for certification of an interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. §1292(b).
- Court denied reconsideration and denied certification for interlocutory appeal, concluding no extraordinary circumstances warranted relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether justice requires reconsideration of the flight-line data order | Arias II established relevance; need for data to corroborate/contradict accounts. | Reconsideration appropriate due to Friedman elevated relevance standard and security concerns. | Reconsideration denied; no error shown. |
| Whether the court should certify an interlocutory appeal under §1292(b) | Appeal could resolve controlling legal questions on discovery-security balance. | Interlocutory review would impede litigation; no controlling issue or substantial disagreement. | No certification; no exceptional circumstances. |
Key Cases Cited
- Friedman v. Bache Halsey Stuart Shields, Inc., 738 F.2d 1336 (D.C.Cir. 1984) (FOIA-like exemptions not automatically applied in discovery; need balancing test)
- Negley v. FBI, 825 F. Supp. 2d 58 (D.D.C. 2011) (reconsideration standard; extraordinary circumstances required)
- Graham v. Mukasey, 608 F. Supp. 2d 56 (D.D.C. 2009) (interlocutory appeals require exceptional circumstances)
- National Community Reinvestment Coalition v. Accredited Home Lenders Holding Co., 597 F. Supp. 2d 120 (D.D.C. 2009) (standard for §1292(b) certification; controlling question of law and substantial ground for difference of opinion)
- Al Maqaleh v. Gates, 620 F. Supp. 2d 51 (D.D.C. 2009) (rare, exceptional circumstances needed for interlocutory review)