Cheng v. Department of Justice
- Analisa Torres
- 1:23-cv-03983
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Cheng v. Department of Justice, Judge Torres adopted the recommendation against dismissal, allowing Cheng’s records lawsuit to continue.
Sheng-Wen Cheng’s Freedom of Information Act case continues after the court adopted the recommendation against the Government’s dismissal motion; the Government must propose a schedule for its summary-judgment motion.
What happened
Cheng v. Department of Justice concerns Sheng-Wen Cheng’s request under the Freedom of Information Act for unclassified documents that former President Donald J. Trump took to his Mar-a-Lago residence. Cheng represented himself. The Government asked the court to dismiss the case as moot, arguing that Cheng had conceded the Federal Bureau of Investigation properly withheld the records.
A magistrate judge recommended denying the Government’s motion. No one objected to that recommendation. The District Court reviewed it for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake, and found none.
Judge Analisa Torres adopted the recommendation in full. The Government must propose a schedule for its summary-judgment motion by March 26, 2024, so the case continues rather than ending on the Government’s dismissal motion.
The detailed version
- Cheng v. Department of Justice · No. 1:23-cv-03983
- Analisa Torres
- Mar. 19, 2024
Background
On May 12, 2023, Sheng-Wen Cheng, representing himself, filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. He sought all unclassified documents that former President Donald J. Trump took to his Mar-a-Lago residence from the White House.
The Government moved to dismiss the case as moot. It argued that Cheng had conceded the Federal Bureau of Investigation properly withheld the requested records under 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(A). The opinion does not provide the underlying details of the parties’ arguments beyond that description.
Report and Recommendation
The District Court had referred the Government’s motion to Magistrate Judge Gary Stein. Judge Stein issued a Report and Recommendation advising that the motion be denied. The parties were notified that they could object, but no objections were filed before the deadline.
When no objection is filed, the District Court reviews the recommendation for clear error—an obvious mistake. The court found no clear error and adopted Judge Stein’s Report and Recommendation in its entirety.
Ruling and Next Steps
The court adopted the recommendation that the Government’s motion be denied. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 33. The Government must submit a proposed briefing schedule for its summary-judgment motion by March 26, 2024. The order therefore did not end the case on the Government’s motion to dismiss.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.