Khine v. DHS, No. 17-1924, 2018 WL 4567167 (D.D.C. Sept. 24, 2018) (Contreras, J,.)

Khine v. DHS, No. 17-1924, 2018 WL 4567167 (D.D.C. Sept. 24, 2018) (Contreras, J,.)

Re:  Request for records concerning "'Assessment of the case'"

Disposition:  Granting defendant's motion to dismiss; granting plaintiffs' motion to file sur-reply

• Litigation Considerations, Mootness and Other Grounds for Dismissal:  "[T]he Court concludes that Plaintiffs' allegations regarding [plaintiff] establish standing to bring their policy-or-practice claim."  "First, Plaintiffs have satisfied their burden to 'demonstrate [the] existence' of the alleged policy-or-practice."  The court finds that "the complaint sufficiently details 'specific instances of conduct by [DHS] that [Plaintiffs] claim[ ] are manifestations of the alleged [policy-or-practice] at issue,' . . . and it alleges that this policy-or-practice was applied to Plaintiffs' FOIA request for [plaintiff's] asylum materials and Assessment.."  "Second, Plaintiffs sufficiently allege that [plaintiff] is 'likely to be subjected to the [alleged] policy again.'"  The court relates that "Plaintiffs suggest that these pending and future requests are 'likely to implicate the alleged policies and lead to future injury,' . . . because Catholic Charities' 'primary institutional activities' include representing asylum applicants and 'monitor[ing] and examin[ing] the work of asylum officers,' and it 'relies heavily and frequently on FOIA to conduct work that is essential to the performance of' these institutional activities."
   
• Litigation Considerations, Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies:  The court holds that "[t]here is no dispute that Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit before exhausting their administrative remedies by appealing DHS's initial response."  The court finds that "Plaintiffs take issue with the level of detail supplied in DHS's initial response, but they do not cite any case law suggesting that the response was insufficient to trigger the exhaustion requirement."  Also, the court finds that, "to the extent Plaintiffs contend that DHS's alleged policy of sending boilerplate, inadequate initial responses will result in future FOIA violations, the administrative appeal process and the filing of a lawsuit would not moot that contention."  "This Court will not deviate from the exhaustion requirement based on Plaintiffs' unfounded concern."