Bal v. U.S. Department of the Treasury
- Ona Wang
- 1:21-cv-04702
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Bal v. U.S. Department of the Treasury, Judge Wang denied Bal’s motion to delay summary-judgment briefing pending discovery in his Freedom of Information Act case.
John Bal’s request to delay summary-judgment briefing and obtain discovery in his remaining Freedom of Information Act claims.
What happened
In Bal v. U.S. Department of the Treasury, John Bal asked the court to delay briefing on both sides’ summary-judgment motions until 30 days after discovery ended. The remaining claims concern whether the Office of Foreign Assets Control improperly redacted records produced under the Freedom of Information Act.
The court explained that these cases are usually decided without discovery. It said discovery is generally unnecessary when the agency provides adequate affidavits or declarations, and that a plaintiff must show bad faith by the agency to justify discovery. The court found Bal’s request premature because he could review the agency’s submissions before filing his response and cross-motion.
Judge Ona T. Wang denied Bal’s letter motion and directed the Clerk to close the motion. The opinion also states that Bal had made no allegation or showing that the defendants acted in bad faith.
The detailed version
- Bal v. U.S. Department of the Treasury · No. 1:21-cv-04702
- Ona Wang
- May 2, 2024
Background
The only remaining claims are John Bal’s Freedom of Information Act claims, and only insofar as he challenges the Office of Foreign Assets Control’s redactions of produced records. Bal filed a letter motion asking the court to delay briefing on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment until 30 days after discovery closed.
Court’s analysis
The court stated that district courts have broad discretion to manage pretrial discovery and that Freedom of Information Act cases are typically resolved without discovery. Discovery about an agency’s search or claimed exemptions is generally unnecessary when the agency’s affidavits or declarations are adequate on their face. The court also stated that a plaintiff must show bad faith by the agency to justify discovery.
The court found Bal’s discovery request premature because he would have an opportunity to review the agency’s affidavits and declarations before filing his cross-motion for summary judgment and opposition to the defendants’ motion. The court further found that Bal had not alleged, much less shown, bad faith by the defendants.
Disposition
Judge Ona T. Wang denied Bal’s letter motion, ECF 91. The Clerk was directed to close that motion. The opinion does not resolve the underlying Freedom of Information Act claims or the parties’ summary-judgment motions.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.