3
Shared Docs
3
Same-Page
6 / 3
Mentions
el, 554 F.3d 274 (2d Cir. 2009) 5, 9 Coleman v. FBI, 13 F. Supp. 2d 75 (D.D.C. 1998) 10 Dep't of Def. v. FLRA, 510 U.S. 487 (1994) 7 E.B. v. New York City Board of Educ., 233 F.R.D. 289 (E.D.N.Y. 2005) 8 Gonzalez v. U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Servs., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134482 (S.D.N.Y. July 29, 2020) 2 G
munications protected by the privilege. See id.; Schiller v. City of New York, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4285, at *34 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 19, 2007); E.B. v. New York City Board of Educ., 233 F.R.D. 289, 293 (E.D.N.Y. 2005). Contrary to the Government's proposed application of Exemption 5, the deliberative process privilege "does no
e documents appear to be largely factual in nature and therefore are not subject to a blanket withholding under Exemption 5. (Pl.'s Br., at 19); see Grand Central P 'ship, Inc. v. Cuomo, 166 F.3d 473, 482 (2d Cir. 1999) ("Purely factual material not reflecting the agency's deliberative process is not protected.")
el, 554 F.3d 274 (2d Cir. 2009) 5, 9 Coleman v. FBI, 13 F. Supp. 2d 75 (D.D.C. 1998) 10 Dep't of Def. v. FLRA, 510 U.S. 487 (1994) 7 E.B. v. New York City Board of Educ., 233 F.R.D. 289 (E.D.N.Y. 2005) 8 Gonzalez v. U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Servs., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134482 (S.D.N.Y. July 29, 2020) 2 G
munications protected by the privilege. See id.; Schiller v. City of New York, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4285, at *34 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 19, 2007); E.B. v. New York City Board of Educ., 233 F.R.D. 289, 293 (E.D.N.Y. 2005). Contrary to the Government's proposed application of Exemption 5, the deliberative process privilege "does no
e documents appear to be largely factual in nature and therefore are not subject to a blanket withholding under Exemption 5. (Pl.'s Br., at 19); see Grand Central P 'ship, Inc. v. Cuomo, 166 F.3d 473, 482 (2d Cir. 1999) ("Purely factual material not reflecting the agency's deliberative process is not protected.")
el, 554 F.3d 274 (2d Cir. 2009) 5, 9 Coleman v. FBI, 13 F. Supp. 2d 75 (D.D.C. 1998) 10 Dep't of Def. v. FLRA, 510 U.S. 487 (1994) 7 E.B. v. New York City Board of Educ., 233 F.R.D. 289 (E.D.N.Y. 2005) 8 Gonzalez v. U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Servs., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134482 (S.D.N.Y. July 29, 2020) 2 G
munications protected by the privilege. See id.; Schiller v. City of New York, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4285, at *34 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 19, 2007); E.B. v. New York City Board of Educ., 233 F.R.D. 289, 293 (E.D.N.Y. 2005). Contrary to the Government's proposed application of Exemption 5, the deliberative process privilege "does no
e documents appear to be largely factual in nature and therefore are not subject to a blanket withholding under Exemption 5. (Pl.'s Br., at 19); see Grand Central P 'ship, Inc. v. Cuomo, 166 F.3d 473, 482 (2d Cir. 1999) ("Purely factual material not reflecting the agency's deliberative process is not protected.")
Entities connected to both New York City Board of Educ and Grand Central P '
Timothy Dalton Vaughn
PERSON
Julie K. Brown
PERSON
Alberto Gonzales
PERSONPerez
PERSONColeman
PERSONShapiro
PERSON
Andrew Cuomo
PERSON
The New York Times
ORGANIZATION
Human Rights Watch
ORGANIZATION
Schiller
PERSON
Metropolitan Correctional Center
ORGANIZATIONChristina Goldbaum
PERSONTimes Co.
ORGANIZATIONFederal Bureau of Prisons
ORGANIZATIONNicholas Tartaglione
PERSONAli Watkins
PERSONAl-Amyn Sumar
PERSONN.Y. Times Co.
ORGANIZATIONDep't
ORGANIZATIONSuicide
PERSON