Case 1:14-cv-03948-VSB Document 2 Filed 06/03/14 Page 1 of 8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
THE NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY and CHARLIE SAVAGE,

rt- I~ ~ rr;- r: ." ,, o/J

X

~ .!1 .!1·!032014 ~

U.S.t,>:.:-:: ~.1). N.Y.

-against-
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,

COMPLAINT

Defendant.
_________________________________________X

Plaintiffs THE NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY and CHARLIE SAVAGE, by their

undersigned attorneys, allege for their Complaint: 1. This is an action under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552
("FOIA"), to order the production of agency records from Defendant United States Department of Justice ("DOJ"), and its constituent part, the National Security Division ("NSD"), in response to a request properly made by Plaintiffs The New York Times Company and Charlie Savage

(collectively "The Times").

PARTIES

2.

Plaintiff The New York Times Company publishes The New York Times

newspaper. The New York Times Company is headquartered in this judicial district at 620

Eighth Avenue, New York, New York. 3. Plaintiff Charlie Savage is a reporter for The New York Times.

57731

1

Case 1:14-cv-03948-VSB Document 2 Filed 06/03/14 Page 2 of 8

4. Defendant DOJ is an agency of the federal government that has possession

and control of the records that Plaintiffs seek.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

5. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1331 and 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B). 6. Venue is premised on the place of business of Plaintiffs and is proper in

this district under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B).

7.

Plaintiffs have exhausted all administrative remedies available in regards

to the request at issue. DOJ failed to respond to the request within the time frames set by FOIA, and therefore Plaintiffs are deemed to have exhausted all administrative remedies pursuant to 5

U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(C).

FACTS

8. In 1978, Congress enacted the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act

("FISA") to govern the procedures for electronic surveillance conducted by the government for

national security purposes.

9.

The statute created the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court ("FISC"),

whose members would be unilaterally selected by the Chief Justice from the ranks of Article III

judges to serve staggered, seven-year terms. Each judge sits for a week at a time, and there is a

three-member FISA Court of Review to hear any appeals of the FISC's rulings.

10. Congress empowered the FISC to grant or deny wiretap orders requested

by federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies involved in national security matters. Later, Congress expanded this authority to encompass orders for physical searches as well.

57731

2

Case 1:14-cv-03948-VSB Document 2 Filed 06/03/14 Page 3 of 8
11. These orders are to be granted or denied based on a simple standard akin to ex parte requests for warrants in ordinary Article III courts: whether facts offered by the government provide probable cause to believe that the target is a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power and that each of the facilities at which surveillance is directed is being used by that target.
12. From its inception, the FISC has been cloaked in a high degree of secrecy. Consistent with judicial practices in other courts for simple yes-or-no decisions about wiretap and search orders in ongoing investigations, FISC proceedings are not publicly noticed and only government lawyers are permitted to appear in the court, without adversarial process.
13. Virtually all of the court papers, including the government's filing and the court's orders and opinions, are designated as classified and withheld from public view. If the court grants a government request for authority, there is no one to file an appeal.
14. Over the past decade, there has been growing public attention to the expansion of government surveillance and data-collection activities set in motion following the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
15. In 2013, Edward Snowden, a former government contractor, leaked classified documents to journalists. The resulting news articles, and subsequent declassifications, brought to light that the FISC had, since 2006, granted government requests to systematically collect data in bulk on Americans' domestic phone calls and, from 2004 to 2011, granted government requests to systematically collect data in bulk on Americans' e-mail traffic. They also showed how the FISC had become deeply involved in interpreting and overseeing the warrantless surveillance program authorized by the FISA Amendments Act of2008.

57731

3

Case 1:14-cv-03948-VSB Document 2 Filed 06/03/14 Page 4 of 8

16. These and other revelations and declassifications showed that the court had evolved away from its basic task of approving surveillance, for which its structures and processes were designed. Rather than merely granting yes-or-no review of whether the standard had been met for wiretap or search orders, it was now also engaged in complex legal analysis interpreting constitutional rights and surveillance statutes, generating legal opinions that were dozens of pages in length and that have had nationwide, programmatic consequence for the privacy rights and civil liberties of Americans.
17. In the wake of those revelations, both members of Congress and civil liberties group intensified efforts to have the government provide a greater degree of transparency about what the FISC has been doing and how the court has interpreted the
Constitution and federal statutes. 18. The government has begun selectively declassifying certain information
related to surveillance activities and FISC, including certain redacted decisions. 19. However, many crucial documents related to FISC remain secret. 20. On March 12, 2014, Mr. Savage submitted a FOIA request (the "Request")
to DOJ seeking certain materials pertaining to the FISC. 21. The Request sought "all government motions and briefs, judicial orders,
and memorandum opinions" concerning the following FISC litigation: 1) The July 22, 2002 case, "In Re Electronic Surveillance and Physical Search oflnternational Terrorist Groups, Their Agents, and Related Targets"
2) The "Raw Take" sharing order 3) The January 10, 2007 orders bringing the warrantless surveillance program under FISC authority whose existence were disclosed by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales in his Jan. 17, 2007,

57731

4

Case 1:14-cv-03948-VSB Document 2 Filed 06/03/14 Page 5 of 8

letter to Congresshttps://www.documentcloud.org/documentsll 018118alberto-gonzales-psp-letter .html
4) The January 10, 2007, Domestic Content order and Foreign Content order discussed in the leaked draft NSA IG report https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/71889 5-igreport.html
5) The "Large Content" FISA orders, referenced in the leaked STELLARWIND and FISA/PAAIFAA classification guides https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1 0613 51-stellarwindclassification-guide.html; http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/20 14/03/12/us/fisa-classificationdoc.html
6) The decision by a FISC judge before whom the January 10, 2007, orders came up for renewal in April 2007, and who narrowed or altered them, as disclosed by then-DNI Mike McConnell in an interview with the El Paso Times published on August 22, 2007 http://www.elpasotimes.com/news/ci 6685679
7) Decisions approving targeting and minimization and implementation rules regarding the Protect America Act
8) The Sept. 4, 2008, memorandum opinion regarding the implementation of the FISA Amendments Act, referenced in the declassified ruling of October 3, 2011, by Judge Bates http://www.nvtimes.com/interactive/20 13/08/22/us/22nsa-opiniondocument.html
9) All programmatic certifications under the Protect America Act
10) All programmatic certifications under the FISA Amendments Act, including targeting directed at foreign governments, factions, entities and foreign based political organizations; targeting directed at groups engaged in international terrorism or activities in preparation thereof; and targeting directed at persons, groups and entities involved in the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, advanced conventional weapons, disruptive technologies and their deliver systems
11) The decision around early 2012 to extend raw take sharing access to the,National Counterterrorism Center
12) Matters associated with bulk collection under Section 215 of the Patriot Act (FISA Business Records provision) for records related to

57731

5

Case 1:14-cv-03948-VSB Document 2 Filed 06/03/14 Page 6 of 8
financial transfers 13) Matters associated with bulk collection under Section 215 of the Patriot Act (FISA Business Records provision), other than those regarding telephony metadata that have already been declassified and released by the Director of National Intelligence 14) Matters associated with bulk collection under the FISA PRITT provision, other than those regarding e-mail metadata that have already been declassified and released 15) Any other motions, opinions and orders after Sept. 11, 2001, that dealt with programmatic issues rather than individual wiretap requests
22. On April 10, 2014, NDS responded by acknowledging the Request and granting expedited processing.
23. There has been no further communication from NDS or any other unit of DOJ regarding the Request.
24. DOJ's substantive response to the Report Request, either producing documents or denying the request in accordance with FOIA, was due twenty (20) business days after receipt of the request.
COUNT 25. Plaintiffs repeat, reallege, and reincorporate the allegations m the foregoing paragraphs as though fully set forth herein. 26. DOJ is an agency subject to FOIA and must therefore release in response to a FOIA request any disclosable'records in its possession at the time of the request and provide a lawful reason for withholding any other materials as to which it is claiming an exemption.

57731

6

Case 1:14-cv-03948-VSB Document 2 Filed 06/03/14 Page 7 of 8

27. Under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(A), DOJ was required to provide documents or issue a denial within 20 business days of receiving the Request.
28. Under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(C), a person making a request for materials under FOIA "shall be deemed to have exhausted his administrative remedies with respect to such a request if the agency fails to comply with the applicable time limit provisions" ofFOIA.
29. Accordingly, The Times is deemed to have exhausted its administrative remedies as to the Request.
30. DOJ has asserted no lawful basis under FOIA for withholding documents
asked for by the Request. 31. DOJ's failure to provide responsive documents violates FOIA. 32. Accordingly, The Times is entitled to an order compelling the DOJ to
undertake an adequate search of its records and produce the documents sought by the Report
Request.

REQUEST FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court:

a.

Declare that the documents sought by the Request, as described in the

foregoing paragraphs, are public under 5 U.S.C. § 552 and 5 U.S.C. § 552(a) and must be

disclosed;

b.

Order the DOJ to undertake an adequate search for the requested records

and provide those records to Plaintiffs within 20 business days of the Court's order;

c.

Award Plaintiffs the costs of this proceeding, including reasonable

attorney's fees, as expressly permitted by FOIA; and

57731

7

Case 1:14-cv-03948-VSB Document 2 Filed 06/03/14 Page 8 of 8

proper.

d. Grant Plaintiffs such other and further relief as this Court deems just and

Dated: New York, New York June 2, 2014

'D---.4 [ t_ .'-_,--
David E. McCraw, Esq. D. Victoria Baranetsky, Esq. Legal Department The New York Times Company 620 8th Avenue, 18th Floor New York, NY 10018 phone: (212) 556-4031 fax: (212) 556-1009 e-mail: mccraw@nytimes.com Counsel for Plaintiffs

57731

8

 Case 1:14-cv-03948-VSB Document 19 Filed 10/28/15 Page 1 of 2

Case 1:14-cv-03948-VSB Document 19 Filed 10/28/15 Page 2 of 2
10/28/2015

The New York Times Company et al v. United States Department of Justice, Docket No. 1_14-cv-03948 (S.D.N.Y. Jun 03, 2014),
General Information

Court
Federal Nature of Suit Docket Number Status

United States District Court for the Southern District of New York; United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
Freedom of Information Act[895]
1:14-cv-03948
CLOSED

© 2019 The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Service // PAGE 3

 U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney Southern District of New York
86 Chambers Street New York, New York 10007
July 31, 2015
By Electronic Mail
David E. McCraw, Esq. Jeremy A. Kutner, Esq. The New York Times Company 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018 E-mail: mccrad@nytimes.com
jeremy.kutner@nytimes.com
Re: The New York Times Co. v. U.S. Department of Justice, 14 Civ. 3948 (VSB)
Dear David and Jeremy:
This Office represents the United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”), the defendant in the above-referenced matter. DOJ has completed its review and processing of the items described in paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Stipulation and Order Regarding Additional Processing and Briefing, dated March 30, 2015 (the “Stipulation”).
With respect to paragraph 4 of the Stipulation, DOJ is releasing 15 documents with redactions. Information has been redacted from these documents pursuant to 5 U.S.C. §§ 552(b)(1), (b)(3), (b)(6), and (b)(7)(E). Each redacted document being released has been marked with the applicable FOIA exemption or exemptions. Additional documents that were identified as responsive to categories 7 and 9 of Plaintiffs’ March 12, 2014, FOIA request, as narrowed by the parties’ joint submission of October 9, 2014 (the “Request”), have been withheld in full.
With respect to paragraph 5 of the Stipulation, DOJ can neither confirm nor deny the existence of any documents responsive to category 14 of the Request.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely,

PREET BHARARA United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York

Enclosures

By: /s/ John D. Clopper JOHN D. CLOPPER ANDREW E. KRAUSE Assistant United States Attorneys Telephone: (212) 637-2716/2769 Facsimile: (212) 637-0033 E-mail: john.clopper@usdoj.gov andrew.krause@usdoj.gov

2

All redacted information exempt unde~ (b)(1) and/or (b)(3).

Approved for Public Release

MIN!)T!JJZAT.iON P-~oo~~-~SA~ Q)~Nif,i:f!tf-G~ wrtlt NIM.
rocQOOST. N:l.Jl'IIB~~Mm'l: t

S.J~-~ AU'rI!O.mzAT.iP.1\1.l<RC>M" ~~tt<m.N.E'll!" Q~'L .Yi(D·'f.l{~ DmEctQB. Qli-Mil>i1))lilNAL~T$'.L.Ll~1Q A.CQOOU: i'c.i&ElGN
i'NTJ!:i,LlCENCEiNF\O~l.'f i!'~:kiN$TO-$EctlQJ!I iQ$~ 0'Yt:$!.E Ffi)!UllG1'1 l{IITW.rMGlll.lli'..cJi!l,$U~Vli!U,.LAl'ICE A<IT

!. W-!ih."'5):«1 ~- tha1!nfotin;ili0n \De NSA ~ires JJ~ttl !hi; Q¢.J6.~·ilf
tli~u\\l.l!!:t;;!U< ~llt;li (if"tlr<>{fmted ~ #·the tlir~G'C Gfhiatii;n&
ll:rtB~~ .!hoi.M$;\ will: f6l)'f/W~

(~· tb~ ~<lfltd }!.la!~ti.ti(l)l l?t'Ql)edi;reil ~r :at~l'!tr<;tti[q S\:ttll~){tlli<;<>

C®ua.GW,d~y tlie.Natloo.al fk.c:un't,: t.~i:;t {~·l\'Ol!lwn u J\.~·.tJl) thilt<!d

Sllat~ ·Sl~l$ l'nti;>Jll~tie:J!ll.iJIAAi¥1l. l oAw"~;r,.r'."-.',' e·;·"~""."'I"' .-,-,,A..·..•,-,,,'.-.',',j;1p'~.•il lififh.

~.",'>~..1.l. w;".'-hQ~lI¢9·i'ign\:l!•'.1\.-'~<:1ibll.l~cm...~ OO ·"<~ "l"•-''"""h"'r·J-'l"lb'""J"':"":"""

I"""'"''·~'-

~b) ¢ertinl.l of~~nt\a!i.oM tQ.i)ie B!f.ndd Nt!A !'ts~ -1.l:li~•tjqiu ·
1"-it>co&_.lt<)$'i?r ~ecwn\<1 sunve.illa>.1Jl!): ~!'?41),Y ilslii F\'l;el;gn mtcl1i&ett~ SWl'eillm;1~ Clltm; ii~}If .l!J;,]fl~flth)l!l~ S"ur;r~ t;\/uf,./!'ftJ!IJiQtiJ $/llajlfii 'i/f . ~ ffife-mattitJ! ({al1:ti~.i sfa Gr;iw l.!fls.1Vi¢Pe.iMt Jof!t!irllmtS".),mWubilc;lil;1itt¥Q1il.<lf1i.«.a.tio.m.i-.mJ:~es~e?t~-·;

t. The~l&~ll,gshall be adaedt1 tl\~endo.'f~pn;~(f) ot:lh.esli »landmd li!SA:ll1$J\p&lth"til; .

(i~· Tlt-~;1/l~ti;a-1.SC<:llmty I'.liYlS!~ ,d( fhe~~ of:J:ustioa smu1 ~~14\1{;~~~ tlu!t.inlimiia.!iOli ~.i'itii1$ ~onmi.unicat!oos ofou cill)C~Q!!l Onl.1~ S'tat"'5 FSOilathliJ;'iii
.efllln.~ !l;l\;llls..~ tl)<Jl$ements ~th= pri!@.u;<es ~ 1J}e F.=l;pi. !!rtlllli.g<iniOt\ s~l!A\1~ A.ct
2, Tho fpl~~ ~l! ~~d!l¢ M:> ~11 .e,nd ~S@an 4!'1?' <Gf th¢s!i.
gtanclaFd 'NSA F(&A.p~>
Wi~ respect l1l My Dth!l1' ~!'nf!li~Jjca.ti.OD, \\!hem i~ 41 8¥.'p!it?ot to J;iS&~s.mg i)~t1f \li~.~ ®mmum~on- is i'Al!Wee.n a_ ~W. ati\l'tti.e p,ei;i;pn't. a~~ (or ,<S<)!.)'.1¢>ne ~g,1;1n bl>hali ~f
the att~y), eon~l~~ a1h!ce being :lQU$1.i:t hy the. f()nner .from tile Tait.er, &Ucb commimlc1;1:fo!!B :relatl;ng lo: fo"Rign
Derived From; .Ns;V-OS~M 1.;$2 l;;ated~ J!P01LHbi!
_· ~slfy0i.i:·~a.i-0a S!!Cl'l.:Bi'!/CQMJ.N'T/iR!;:L 'l'Q JJ~i1.fu."'21ll00

54

CtASS IF I eo ANNEX i;l~.O.Qi!!D0$1

. All redacted information exempt under (b)(1) and/or (b)(3).

Approved for Public Release

ii.i!"'1li~Jn£mna00n ma_y he tf!fiil!led a!Jl}diss~ 'l\'it11iil. lhe U.S. Jiit.;lli~:~itliill ~~<!:atll\>J;ll! !lte ~l\mllw ~ ss bllillg~leg<ai Fiomev.«, ~ · ~tinicatlqnu,.ey 'flOt Oi:~fuiil.ed. "'".itst~ oftll•iR$', 'in!\<!!~~ C~ll1lirl'' wilJi()!lf !heiP,l:Wf. ~iWal 6tlh<i M~tant Altol'llOj' GWeral fortha Na:tiollal ~tr!il)vl~ llrhfa
~.

3. !'..eiofoH\i'wfu&~all ~f!li!~ mh~li<:>mi f}J, Qi~•.niicl (~ Qf~t"tl'( ~11£

tf,esa ~d 1!!3A .Ffs.A ~'¢'

·

·

·

· !'/S./'. maydissem:i•n.rti.e·.no~l.\!ily.•v;,ll1'/.'!il., 1deT!tify ot ~:f.
Jd~!e ~OU C®oo.tn!ag U.nit«lf$~' F"l*->/lll>~O'.:/breigt! ~Yet!llllent11 provided lJw.:: ~ fo~atl~ i!S fu!'ili~ ilf.e!J.tl,l<ro~
inf'~-.n~ el.'tti?ll {!) i.Qe A'iti;lli¢y{.)~er<il 8P\11'19Vos toe·
dl$Sem!ruiti<ttl:~ br (liJ,NSf\, tl{~~"'*>t® in~l:ii)it 1'1\~ i?r!W~ 1ip,Pt1f\'oo·llt.11\e Att<;1t;1ey Generll:f•. frl ~ddil,i'\i.;:, f./Sitmay diss;i-.;ni;,i:$b:: '!!US~ fme!~.l11rd)ig~!J~i~fli'!Wli1il:il'.ff t1> the~~~~ 1'y tb.~
'D.i.r~\lr J;if1'Jati®'il lhl<:l~~~e·~NU a11d ln aucordan.~ w.t~ DNJ,
dk~ve$;,;ml;~et to•th¢ f9!towlnri.pr-0P.\id;ire5;

•

·"•• "

• • ... lr.io .......... -

(2)

PDips<s;m11· I1l•l;"i<,:i'n!!a-"l"iPontWs 'taol·0"'3."LthHle.Iy,L.·'!."r:oNx.~".&,"JA.l''·.~

&l'llie'm\"Jl.etlismay
l.''."/J".'!.!~ 11:f'Q. @~,,,;.,..:.,,

~.b."e!im31"l!S'-•ll:;·

· ~ cansl<l<:ratton. riffue i'<?li!l~SifactDrs; th~ ~ailOOat ·

seC\nitY b!l<)ei:'i\ ti!alfo!t~ S~;m\1¥ tllt!So!l,1!1;>1,y· e~«lt'tu

O'otarii fr"1iil. !l;J1\J<i:tlg l;l:;,;: dJ~eul,ina.ti.on; the. arru\;!1)1!.!.;i:\."\W~ tll

wbfoa'1'he fo~gn. g;ov.emoient·wlil p,µt ill~ i\1foimatloo} aiitL

.my.po\i!ntlil) fiir ~m.icinJl!!V!•.Pll~qi! l;li.ri:h, or. oi,,her

r~tii,ctWo i>fmo'lie!\'l<mt to .J?c-re=nably, eJt!leciied ~ ·p'roi.idlngfhi! lnfuo;na..'ion to the 'fbttii~ ~l'lll:ii:~~ lf!he.
µrnposed r~]l!e!\!($,l Qfth~ !llil$ei;tlnat'ion·!la'v!3 aJilitorx of ,hU1!:rtll.!), rl~ abus..~ tbl!nJ~w shl>lltd beci>1''1$J\!er;;d lo

assessing the potenli;.l ii:ltei.ooomie i.iil.itY, pho/51~ \ittqn,,.Qr oi;her restriot:ioo of rtro~im.t, !lz;d w~er ih;a ~ll'

.shot;ld bis made. la ~es r#.!lere lhel.'4 is a ~aht<i ~ (0

antitlpam that th!i diSsemiM!i<l\1. iv.ill result !n.~notr>.lt ·ifijUIJJ pb~'b,arm;.Ol'other~ctioa,11fmov~en'(: ~/,t.'ie ·

awm·v'ill 9fth.;:NSA1~~ignale Jmel~ P!:rec1Q(.'Wjll,~
lia required;..00 \ll). if dlssem!ili\liQn ts apprev-ed;, 11/SA w,itl

tlll4.ettaii.~· t!i~DJJl;\e steps to e~ Ui.a• th\l .i:\i~$~Wtti:d

,information Will be Used ill'~ aollS!stent wltli U!rli)!d

$E©ti!1fiCOM..INT/1REl..1'0 tJS~J2\l3~\JlO!.!

55

OLA S'S 1'F. I ED ANNEX

All redacted information exempt under (b)(1) and/or (b)(3).

Approved for Public Release

. '
l',lietes ldW'!, l$l~J$ '$X.ll'l;t!i:ive<Qrdet l\T~.-11,~:S~ l!lid. SVPl~le lit&raJ 'C!i~tMI &lib~. .
(J'}' NSA will miilile a< wtj\t@l:teOQid ()(¢¢h~e.
~vedpmsmantfu~~ alllll@~M,
= - la"'vl-la~"li•."!d.'.":1>"1l<'r'i>g.fsuu.r.crl.-e! '.ii.i'iieSwl-l.".".~,".-m·-~ ~ l<fat$lqdna·'"!>~~'.;!<;<-.i-."~l'1"l~"y-' .'.,.,iD....i.~.•.v-,rl1l;el.~.,1..4·,A~..~
_~ ·0ey~en1:1'f.Tu>sti@~ 1!>1i:ll't l•·M ~ liasi~

4. Re&.11>-d\pg df~!41lli.o!ii 11.f.ioVt(!!et1<;e of~ ctj~S·eQ!illtl$ 5f~)ti).~
$~)~~.i;ftli,.;se sta!l.dotd 'NSA; ~A pro~ti~ ~!Ill ~-~eii b~ tM
£611?.Wi~.t
"""'"' im. f~ull.~ t'n.ml"•."y :,"..!•l·a"'p"'·p1"e;aI·m-ll .-'M'"•"~-"~"vi":i":'!-C?l!l!.ea"l!~l•'tW1''."f'!!-ii:t-'-;in•ll;:tii~''1-t"!l'l;>'i1.l.-1i.:.t",..",1~1iil\$OJl.:;>\:l¥Mil. !JI
vICei' ~g,. Q' f.1' ~ ~!".';;~,,'. .•..~;J: ;.e·llllJlil,):\,l_l•.,.....,.,, '".."..'+"Y. c¥..!>,..di-_-..-_;-~-•!~""-n<~.1J4, "~:•1...~
1,1mt6d l!ltat~ ~ 1~t;iiisi t1:1 -iM--Vii1 srn! Qtb~~P.t!ll),lrlatm
~ ~ enil'.mement:!i~~.in·ace~~.5~1);'.;t,¢,. · § 1i06Qi}, f!~ii,v!$ Qft!er11'G. 12,::i:.",..aatl::.. w~ l!P!?~lii. ~
Y~t~"ti~_1n!l'llritm!rl!igi·i-WQ~e!da~4~4qi¢~f;u·.-:tbe~Ai~l,#.l.As.tt--ltb~rn~.·1li-tlQli '
llllY ·C<incei:tiiil~,t.'ed<lI'l!l Crllf).~$,'.qr 1ruCG<$GJ'.di;¢i;tieil!..

5. ThefolJ~g iihaili>.O.·~'tJ;). ~--0f·S~oo (}-0~~N$A

Fl\llA. ~~\!!<:$!

•

"'"""""l;lll"' - _..,.,......,._ " ,, ' .:--: -. ~ N:SA tt~lllil-rstll,'.,p,.r.,o,,=•.!,B... .,s.illf~'S"!i"cR'~0!~>Jl.'.~tl"J''---l"l'.t~l.l,l;:;4'A~Jli-~O1J-i:l-1ltl·i'itl'.1!dit-O"l;~!:-miCiirn~.iA;:'t•(l.tQ.

~:¢P.l); Pt"~li!W.awtov~·oyt!111 A!!.C@l!ll ~~

(~1. The fulfow,ivg sd\l!Hona! n;io.dlti~i;s'tQ 'tile otamd~ NSA l'lSA mtrurniiatfoi, Jffl;l1.:ed:Qr<:a'fiir el.etitrillii¢-i?=';jj!la.n¢0;;

'l. Nlh1'1ilhs"'l1Jii;ng,$li~t1- ~{~{~)ii® f.e)-$(\l); ~d·~) ~iflhll !iii$~.

NSA. HS.11;.prQ<:eduxes-, ~pnt~.:--im ~\tl!it4~!lr lhlS C~tlG-::i.

ma)' b~ -r~~ f()t £;,re :yean. · · • • at

- .I!! - ,. :I<\'\.

l>lider·l'.ltls· Cenffi .- •

2. ·-s~oi;. '.!!"')(~ of th~~ ~$;Oard !il'.SA Fl!l..~mlJ1.lmi:tatlo';J'., ~utes:

Is. deleteli Md re~ei:ed wi!:lu-

·

'I'.<> thr,l e~ ~Wibly ~s4lllle., 'l)ls;,O. 11~001lcl Wlih· a~ ta tM data a.cquir.ed ~n.ant to tlJiS au'llio;"l'ty s1ll!IL !We;,j'fk~ li!att f'>:l:a
Jj:l&"itl!lt·desfgned1 fu mirii'!nize .tfl,e.rW<'i..w of~<tlt:ifoil-ti<lttS ofor <;anc..'"tl)in!f i:J.'tl. ~.tl~ •lhAt4Q !ict.' ~il!liili ii:it.eigi:;i!nt.e11i~® i:nrodliatim'! oli j,Jrid.;~ ~r act'ime,

56

CLAS$ IF l El:i ANNEX

All redacted information exempt under (b)(1) and/or (b)(3).

Approved for Public Release

3, :S.o¢tiqn3fi\tJ)oftrese~di;niJ;f$AFl$AJAiru~un·p~~~
to .,,i)s~·•i:f.,m pre.¢54 b~ suweill'4"'lte" e¥-~ of·i;;fu!'eill;ll P"""'""• ,
;ibl!U not~ly. to tins auzyeftll\tite,

•
SECllET/iCOMIN1'/i:REL TO US •
.- ·""""4
57

 U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney Southern District of New York
86 Chambers Street New York, New York 10007
May 29, 2015
By Electronic Mail
David E. McCraw, Esq. Jeremy A. Kutner, Esq. The New York Times Company 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018 E-mail: mccrad@nytimes.com
jeremy.kutner@nytimes.com
Re: The New York Times Co. v. U.S. Department of Justice, 14 Civ. 3948 (VSB)
Dear David and Jeremy:
This Office represents the United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”), the defendant in the above-referenced matter. DOJ has completed its review and processing of documents in accordance with the schedule set forth in the Stipulation and Order Regarding Additional Processing and Briefing, dated March 30, 2015 (the “Stipulation”).
With respect to paragraph 1 of the Stipulation, DOJ identified three memoranda of law, and is releasing them with redactions as three separate .pdf documents. With respect to paragraph 2 of the Stipulation, DOJ identified one memorandum of law and one order, and is releasing them with redactions, combined into one .pdf document. Information has been redacted from these documents pursuant to 5 U.S.C. §§ 552(b)(1), (b)(3), (b)(6), (b)(7)(A), and (b)(7)(E). Each redacted document being released has been marked with the applicable FOIA exemption or exemptions.
With respect to paragraph 3, DOJ can neither confirm nor deny the existence of any documents responsive to categories 12 or 13 of the FOIA Request, as defined in the Stipulation.
These documents will be made available to the public on Monday, June 1, 2015, on the Director of National Intelligence’s website, “IC on the Record,” at http://icontherecord.tumblr.com/, as well as at www.dni.gov.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely,

PREET BHARARA United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York

By:

/s/ Emily E. Daughtry

JOHN D. CLOPPER

EMILY E. DAUGHTRY

ANDREW E. KRAUSE

Assistant United States Attorneys

Telephone: (212) 637-2716/2777/2769

Facsimile: (212) 637-0033

E-mail: john.clopper@usdoj.gov

emily.daughtry@usdoj.gov

andrew.krause@usdoj.gov

Enclosures

2

  APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE

 U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney Southern District of New York
86 Chambers Street New York, New York 10007
December 12, 2014
By Electronic Mail
David E. McCraw, Esq. Jeremy A. Kutner, Esq. The New York Times Company 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018 E-mail: mccrad@nytimes.com
jeremy.kutner@nytimes.com
Re: The New York Times Co. v. U.S. Department of Justice, 14 Civ. 3948 (VSB)
Dear David and Jeremy:
This Office represents the United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”), the defendant in the above-referenced matter. In accordance with the schedule set forth in the parties’ joint submission on October 9, 2014, see Dkt. No. 11, as modified by the Court’s December 8, 2014, order, see Dkt. No. 13, DOJ is releasing the enclosed documents in partial response to the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) request that is the subject of this litigation. These documents are responsive to categories 3 through 6 of the request. Information has been redacted from these documents pursuant to 5 U.S.C. §§ 552(b)(1), (b)(3), (b)(6), (b)(7)(A), (b)(7)(C), and (b)(7)(E). Each redacted document being released has been marked with the applicable FOIA exemption or exemptions.
These documents also are being made available to the public on the Director of National Intelligence’s website, “IC on the Record,” at http://icontherecord.tumblr.com/, as well as at www.dni.gov.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, PREET BHARARA United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York
By: /s/ Andrew E. Krause JOHN D. CLOPPER EMILY E. DAUGHTRY ANDREW E. KRAUSE Assistant United States Attorneys Telephone: (212) 637-2716/2777/2769 Facsimile: (212) 637-0033 E-mail: john.clopper@usdoj.gov emily.daughtry@usdoj.gov andrew.krause@usdoj.gov
Enclosures
2

  Case: 1:14-cv-3948 As of: 12/11/2016 01:52 PM EST 1 of 3
U.S. District Court Southern District of New York (Foley Square) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:14−cv−03948−VSB

CLOSED,ECF

The New York Times Company et al v. United States Department of Justice Assigned to: Judge Vernon S. Broderick Cause: 05:552 Right to Privacy Act
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 06/03/2014 Date Terminated: 10/28/2015 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 895 Freedom of Information Act Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Defendant

The New York Times Company

represented by David Edward McCraw The New York Times Company (10018) 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018 (212) 556−4031 Fax: (212) 556−1009 Email: mccraw@nytimes.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jeremy Alexander Kutner The New York Times Company (10018) 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018 (212) 556−5188 Fax: (212) 556−4634 Email: jeremy.kutner@nytimes.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Charles Savage

represented by David Edward McCraw (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jeremy Alexander Kutner (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant United States Department of Justice

represented by Andrew Edward Krause United States Attorney's Office, SDNY 86 Chambers Street, 3rd Floor New York, NY 10007 (212) 637−2769 Fax: (212) 637−2786 Email: andrew.krause@usdoj.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Emily Ewell Daughtry U.S. Attorney's Office, SDNY (Chambers Street) 86 Chambers Street New York, NY 10007 (212)−637−2800 x1579

Case: 1:14-cv-3948 As of: 12/11/2016 01:52 PM EST 2 of 3
Fax: (212)−637−2717 Email: emily.daughtry@usdoj.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John Dalton Clopper U.S. Attorney's Office, SDNY 86 Chambers Street New York, NY 10007 212 637 2716 Fax: 212 637 0033 Email: john.clopper@usdoj.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 06/03/2014 06/03/2014 06/03/2014 06/03/2014 06/03/2014 07/07/2014 07/08/2014
07/09/2014 07/11/2014 07/29/2014 07/30/2014
08/15/2014
09/23/2014

# Docket Text
1 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed. (js) (Entered: 06/06/2014)
2 COMPLAINT against United States Department of Justice. (Filing Fee $ 350.00, Receipt Number 465401096628)Document filed by The New York Times Company, Charles Savage.(js) (Entered: 06/06/2014)
SUMMONS ISSUED as to United States Department of Justice, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General. (js) (Entered: 06/06/2014)
Magistrate Judge Andrew J. Peck is so designated. (js) (Entered: 06/06/2014)
Case Designated ECF. (js) (Entered: 06/06/2014)
3 ANSWER to 2 Complaint. Document filed by United States Department of Justice.(Daughtry, Emily) (Entered: 07/07/2014)
4 ORDER AND NOTICE OF INITIAL CONFERENCE: Initial Conference set for 8/8/2014 at 12:45 PM in Courtroom 518 of the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Vernon S. Broderick. (Signed by Judge Vernon S. Broderick on 7/8/2014) (mro) Modified on 7/9/2014 (mro). (Entered: 07/08/2014)
5 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by John Dalton Clopper on behalf of United States Department of Justice. (Clopper, John) (Entered: 07/09/2014)
6 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Andrew Edward Krause on behalf of United States Department of Justice. (Krause, Andrew) (Entered: 07/11/2014)
7 LETTER addressed to Judge Vernon S. Broderick from David E. McCraw dated 07/29/2014 re: Date of Initial Conference. Document filed by Charles Savage, The New York Times Company.(McCraw, David) (Entered: 07/29/2014)
8 MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: 7 Letter filed by The New York Times Company, Charles Savage. ENDORSEMENT: The August 8 initial conference will be adjourned to September 12, 2014 at 10:30 a.m. APPLICATION GRANTED. SO ORDERED. ( Initial Conference set for 9/12/2014 at 10:30 AM before Judge Vernon S. Broderick.) (Signed by Judge Vernon S. Broderick on 7/30/2014) (mro) (Entered: 07/30/2014)
9 ORDER: The Initial Conference previously scheduled for September 12, 2014 at 10:30 a.m. is hereby rescheduled to October 17, 2014 at 10:30 a.m. in Courtroom 518 of the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, New York, New York. (Initial Conference set for 10/17/2014 at 10:30 AM in Courtroom 518, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Vernon S. Broderick.) (Signed by Judge Vernon S. Broderick on 8/15/2014) (mro) (Entered: 08/15/2014)
10 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Jeremy Alexander Kutner on behalf of Charles Savage, The New York Times Company. (Kutner, Jeremy) (Entered: 09/23/2014)

Case: 1:14-cv-3948 As of: 12/11/2016 01:52 PM EST 3 of 3

10/09/2014 10/17/2014 10/31/2014 12/05/2014 12/08/2014 03/20/2015 03/23/2015 03/30/2015 04/01/2015 10/27/2015
10/28/2015 10/28/2015

11 JOINT LETTER addressed to Judge Vernon S. Broderick from Andrew E. Krause dated October 9, 2014 re: joint initial pre−trial conference submission (in accordance with Dkt. No. 4). Document filed by United States Department of Justice. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Krause, Andrew) (Entered: 10/09/2014)
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Vernon S. Broderick: Initial Pretrial Conference held on 10/17/2014. (msa) (Entered: 10/17/2014)
Set/Reset Deadlines: DOJ's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment due by 5/1/2015. Plaintiffs' Opposition and Cross−Motion for Partial Summary Judgment due by 6/1/2015; DOJ's Reply/Opposition brief due by 7/1/2015. Plaintiffs' Reply brief due by 7/15/2015. (msa) (Entered: 10/31/2014)
12 LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to transmit first release of documents addressed to Judge Vernon S. Broderick from Andrew E. Krause dated December 5, 2014. Document filed by United States Department of Justice.(Krause, Andrew) (Entered: 12/05/2014)
13 ORDER granting 12 Letter Motion for Extension of Time. APPLICATION GRANTED. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Vernon S. Broderick on 12/8/2014) (ajs) (Entered: 12/08/2014)
14 LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time for Proposed Schedule addressed to Judge Vernon S. Broderick from David E. McCraw dated 03/20/2015. Document filed by Charles Savage, The New York Times Company.(McCraw, David) (Entered: 03/20/2015)
15 ORDER granting 14 Letter Motion for Extension of Time for Proposed Schedule addressed to Judge Vernon S. Broderick from David E. McCraw dated 03/20/2015. APPLICATION GRANTED. The deadline to submit a proposed production schedule is adjourned until March 30, 2015. (Signed by Judge Vernon S. Broderick on 3/23/2015) (kko) (Entered: 03/23/2015)
16 LETTER addressed to Judge Vernon S. Broderick from AUSA Emily E. Daughtry dated March 30, 2015 re: Proposed Stipulation and Order. Document filed by United States Department of Justice. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Regarding Additional Processing and Briefing)(Daughtry, Emily) (Entered: 03/30/2015)
17 MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: 16 Letter, filed by United States Department of Justice. ENDORSEMENT: So ordered., ( Cross Motions due by 12/14/2015., Motions due by 11/9/2015., Responses due by 1/19/2016., Replies due by 2/9/2016.) (Signed by Judge Vernon S. Broderick on 4/1/2015) (lmb) (Entered: 04/01/2015)
18 DOCUMENT REFERRED TO JUDGE FOR APPROVAL − STIPULATION OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL It is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between the parties and/or their respective counsel(s) that the above−captioned action is voluntarily dismissed, with prejudice against the defendant(s) All Plaintiffs and without costs to either party pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Document filed by The New York Times Company, Charles Savage.(McCraw, David) Modified on 10/28/2015 (km). (Entered: 10/27/2015)
***NOTE TO ATTORNEY − DOCUMENT REFERRED TO JUDGE FOR APPROVAL. Note to Attorney David McCraw Document 18 Stipulation of Voluntary Dismissal was referred to Judge Vernon S. Broderick for approval. (km) (Entered: 10/28/2015)
19 STIPULATION AND ORDER OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL PURSUANT TO FED.R.CIV.P.41(a)(1)(A)(ii): The Complaint shall be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) without costs and without attorneys' fees or conferral of prevailing party status pursuant to FOIA of any other federal statue. (Signed by Judge Vernon S. Broderick on 10/28/2015) (lmb) (Entered: 10/28/2015)


On June 3, 2014, the New York Times and its reporter filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against the Department of Justice (DOJ) under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) seeking production of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) rulings interpreting surveillance law since 9/11. The plaintiff alleged a violation of FOIA because the defendant failed to release these documents in response to a FOIA request. While this litigation was pending, the DOJ produced redacted versions of the FISC documents to the plaintiffs. The case was voluntarily dismissed on October 28, 2015. The case is now closed.