Sherven v. Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA _________________________________________ ) MATTHEW J. SHERVEN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) Case No. 22-cv-2412 (APM) PRIVACY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES ) OVERSIGHT BOARD, ) ) Defendant. ) _________________________________________ )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In this action brought under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), Defendant Privacy

and Civil Liberties Oversight Board moves to dismiss on the ground that pro se Plaintiff Matthew

Sherven failed to exhaust administrative remedies. Def.’s Mot. to Dismiss, ECF No. 10. Despite

receiving notice from the court, see Order, ECF No. 11, Plaintiff did not respond to the motion.

The court has reviewed Defendant’s motion de novo and agrees that this matter must be

dismissed because Plaintiff did not exhaust administrative remedies. “[A] requester under FOIA

must file an administrative appeal within the time limit specified in an agency’s FOIA regulations

or face dismissal of any lawsuit complaining about the agency’s response.” Wilbur v. Cent. Intel.

Agency, 355 F.3d 675, 676 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (internal quotation marks omitted). Here, Plaintiff

received a final determination on his FOIA request on August 8, 2022. Compl., ECF No. 1, at 1.

Defendant’s regulations provide that an administrative appeal must be filed “within 90 calendar

days after the date of the letter denying [the] request.” 6 C.F.R. § 1001.7(b) (2017). Plaintiff,

however, bypassed an administrative appeal and filed suit on August 13, 2022. See Compl. This

matter is therefore dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. For the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 10, is granted. A

separate, final order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

Dated: January 31, 2023 Amit P. Mehta United States District Court Judge