Bigwood v. DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29045
| D.D.C. | 2011Background
- This FOIA case concerns Defendant CIA's handling of plaintiff's requests for records relating to Colombian paramilitary leader Carlos Castaño.
- Plaintiff initially filed in 2008; the court previously dismissed the FOIA claim as time-barred under a six-year statute of limitations.
- The court's March 30, 2010 memorandum held the FOIA claim barred by jurisdictional time limits; plaintiff then sought relief upon reconsideration and attorney's fees.
- Plaintiff argued a new, substantially identical FOIA request was filed the same day the court dismissed, claiming the court should retain jurisdiction long enough to exhaust administrative remedies.
- Defendant argued the mere filing of a new request does not reopen jurisdiction or toll the limitations period, and no intervening change in law or new evidence existed.
- Court denied both motions, concluding the six-year limitation remained jurisdictional and plaintiff was not eligible for attorney's fees.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rule 59(e) relief is warranted to reconsider dismissal on statute of limitations grounds. | Bigwood contends new FOIA request warrants jurisdiction to exhaust admin remedies. | DIA argues no intervening law or new evidence; original judgment stands. | Denied; no intervening change or new justification for reconsideration found. |
| Whether the six-year FOIA statute of limitations is jurisdictional and a bar to relief. | Bigwood asserts possible tolling or waiver due to ongoing releases. | Six-year period is jurisdictional and cannot be waived or tolled to revive suit. | Denied; court previously held limitations deprive jurisdiction and remains controlling. |
| Whether plaintiff is eligible for an attorney's fees award under FOIA. | Litigation spurred broad document production, constituting eligibility. | No causal nexus shown between suit and disclosures; agency delays due to backlog and due diligence. | Denied; no substantial nexus shown to establish eligibility for fees. |
Key Cases Cited
- Spannaus v. Dep't of Justice, 824 F.2d 52 (D.C.Cir. 1987) (six-year limitation as jurisdictional bar to FOIA suit)
- Public Law Educ. Inst. v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 744 F.2d 181 (D.C.Cir. 1984) (elements of prevailing party analysis under FOIA)
- Ciralsky v. Cent. Intelligence Agency, 355 F.3d 661 (D.C.Cir. 2004) (standard for reconsideration and 59(e) motions)
- Firestone v. Firestone, 76 F.3d 1205 (D.C.Cir. 1996) (reconsideration is an extraordinary remedy)
- Alliance for Responsible CFC Policy, Inc. v. Costle, 631 F. Supp. 1469 (D.D.C. 1986) (context of FOIA delay and due diligence in administrative processes)