March 22, 2019
VIA ONLINE PORTAL

Douglas Hibbard
Chief, Initial Request Staff
Office of Information Policy
U.S. Department of Justice
1425 New York Avenue NW
Suite 11050
Washington, DC 20530-0001
Via FOIAOnline
Re: Expedited Freedom of Information Act Request

Dear Mr. Hibbard:
Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552, and the implementing
regulations of the Department of Justice (DOJ), 28 C.F.R. Part 16, American Oversight makes the
following request for records.
Requested Records

American Oversight requests that DOJ produce the following within twenty business days and
seeks expedited review of this request for the reasons identified below:
1. All communications attaching, sending, transferring or otherwise making available any
copy of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report to the Attorney General made in
compliance with 28 C.F.R. § 600.8(c), or any portion of that report, to any individual
not employed by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). A communication to an
individual outside DOJ that contains an excerpt of Mr. Mueller’s report would, for
example, be responsive to this request.
2. All communications containing any summary of the Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s
report to the Attorney General made in compliance with 28 C.F.R. § 600.8(c), or any
portion that of that report, sent, copied, transferred or otherwise made available to any
individual not employed by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). This request seeks
communications as well as records reflecting the communication of the content of Mr.
Mueller’s report outside DOJ, including memoranda, file memos, talking points, notes,
or other summaries.
American Oversight requests that DOJ search—at a minimum—the Office of the Attorney
General, the Office of the Deputy Attorney General, the Office of the Associate Attorney
General, and the Special Counsel’s Office for records responsive to this request.

1030 15th Street NW, Suite B255, Washington, DC 20005   AmericanOversight.org

 Please provide all responsive records from May 17, 2017, through the date of the search.
American Oversight seeks all responsive records regardless of format, medium, or physical
characteristics. In conducting your search, please understand the terms “record,” “document,” and
“information” in their broadest sense, to include any written, typed, recorded, graphic, printed, or
audio material of any kind. We seek records of any kind, including electronic records, audiotapes,
videotapes, and photographs, as well as letters, emails, facsimiles, telephone messages, voice mail
messages and transcripts, notes, or minutes of any meetings, telephone conversations or
discussions. Our request includes any attachments to these records. No category of material should
be omitted from search, collection, and production.
Please search all records regarding agency business. You may not exclude searches of files or
emails in the personal custody of your officials, such as personal email accounts. Records of
official business conducted using unofficial systems or stored outside of official files is subject to
the Federal Records Act and FOIA.1 It is not adequate to rely on policies and procedures that
require officials to move such information to official systems within a certain period of time;
American Oversight has a right to records contained in those files even if material has not yet been
moved to official systems or if officials have, through negligence or willfulness, failed to meet their
obligations.2
In addition, please note that in conducting a “reasonable search” as required by law, you must
employ the most up-to-date technologies and tools available, in addition to searches by individual
custodians likely to have responsive information. Recent technology may have rendered DOJ’s
prior FOIA practices unreasonable. In light of the government-wide requirements to manage
information electronically by the end of 2016, it is no longer reasonable to rely exclusively on
custodian-driven searches.3 Furthermore, agencies that have adopted the National Archives and

See Competitive Enter. Inst. v. Office of Sci. & Tech. Policy, 827 F.3d 145, 149–50 (D.C. Cir.
2016); cf. Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Kerry, 844 F.3d 952, 955–56 (D.C. Cir. 2016).
2
See Competitive Enter. Inst. v. Office of Sci. & Tech. Policy, No. 14-cv-765, slip op. at 8 (D.D.C.
Dec. 12, 2016) (“The Government argues that because the agency had a policy requiring [the
official] to forward all of his emails from his [personal] account to his business email, the
[personal] account only contains duplicate agency records at best. Therefore, the Government
claims that any hypothetical deletion of the [personal account] emails would still leave a copy of
those records intact in [the official’s] work email. However, policies are rarely followed to
perfection by anyone. At this stage of the case, the Court cannot assume that each and every work
related email in the [personal] account was duplicated in [the official’s] work email account.”
(citations omitted)).
3
Presidential Memorandum—Managing Government Records, 76 Fed. Reg. 75,423 (Nov. 28,
2011), https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2011/11/28/presidentialmemorandum-managing-government-records; Office of Mgmt. & Budget, Exec. Office of the
President, Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments & Independent Agencies,
“Managing Government Records Directive,” M-12-18 (Aug. 24, 2012),
https://www.archives.gov/files/records-mgmt/m-12-18.pdf.
1

2

DOJ-19-0375

 Records Administration (NARA) Capstone program, or similar policies, now maintain emails in a
form that is reasonably likely to be more complete than individual custodians’ files. For example, a
custodian may have deleted a responsive email from his or her email program, but DOJ’s
archiving tools would capture that email under Capstone. Accordingly, American Oversight insists
that DOJ use the most up-to-date technologies to search for responsive information and take steps
to ensure that the most complete repositories of information are searched. American Oversight is
available to work with you to craft appropriate search terms. However, custodian searches are still
required; agencies may not have direct access to files stored in .PST files, outside of network
drives, in paper format, or in personal email accounts.

Under the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, agencies must adopt a presumption of disclosure,
withholding information “only if . . . disclosure would harm an interest protected by an exemption”
or “disclosure is prohibited by law.”4 If it is your position that any portion of the requested records
is exempt from disclosure, American Oversight requests that you provide an index of those
documents as required under Vaughn v. Rosen, 484 F.2d 820 (D.C. Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 415
U.S. 977 (1974). As you are aware, a Vaughn index must describe each document claimed as
exempt with sufficient specificity “to permit a reasoned judgment as to whether the material is
actually exempt under FOIA.”5 Moreover, the Vaughn index “must describe each document or
portion thereof withheld, and for each withholding it must discuss the consequences of disclosing
the sought-after information.”6 Further, “the withholding agency must supply ‘a relatively detailed
justification, specifically identifying the reasons why a particular exemption is relevant and
correlating those claims with the particular part of a withheld document to which they apply.’”7
In the event some portions of the requested records are properly exempt from disclosure, please
disclose any reasonably segregable non-exempt portions of the requested records. If it is your
position that a document contains non-exempt segments, but that those non-exempt segments are
so dispersed throughout the document as to make segregation impossible, please state what
portion of the document is non-exempt, and how the material is dispersed throughout the
document.8 Claims of nonsegregability must be made with the same degree of detail as required for
claims of exemptions in a Vaughn index. If a request is denied in whole, please state specifically
that it is not reasonable to segregate portions of the record for release.
You should institute a preservation hold on information responsive to this request. American
Oversight intends to pursue all legal avenues to enforce its right of access under FOIA, including
litigation if necessary. Accordingly, DOJ is on notice that litigation is reasonably foreseeable.

FOIA Improvement Act of 2016 § 2 (Pub. L. No. 114–185).
Founding Church of Scientology v. Bell, 603 F.2d 945, 949 (D.C. Cir. 1979).
6
King v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 830 F.2d 210, 223–24 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (emphases in original).
7
Id. at 224 (citing Mead Data Central, Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of the Air Force, 566 F.2d 242, 251 (D.C.
Cir. 1977)).
8
Mead Data Central, 566 F.2d at 261.
4
5

3

DOJ-19-0375

 To ensure that this request is properly construed, that searches are conducted in an adequate but
efficient manner, and that extraneous costs are not incurred, American Oversight welcomes an
opportunity to discuss its request with you before you undertake your search or incur search or
duplication costs. By working together at the outset, American Oversight and DOJ can decrease
the likelihood of costly and time-consuming litigation in the future.
Where possible, please provide responsive material in electronic format by email or in PDF or
TIF format on a USB drive. Please send any responsive material being sent by mail to American
Oversight, 1030 15th Street NW, Suite B255, Washington, DC 20005. If it will accelerate release
of responsive records to American Oversight, please also provide responsive material on a rolling
basis.
Fee Waiver Request

In accordance with 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(iii) and 28 C.F.R. § 16.10(k), American Oversight
requests a waiver of fees associated with processing this request for records. The subject of this
request concerns the operations of the federal government, and the disclosures will likely
contribute to a better understanding of relevant government procedures by the general public in a
significant way.9 Moreover, the request is primarily and fundamentally for non-commercial
purposes.10
American Oversight requests a waiver of fees because disclosure of the requested information is
“in the public interest because it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding” of
government operations and activities.11 There is extensive public interest in understanding the work
and findings of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of the Russian government’s efforts
to interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and any matters arising directly from that
investigation.12 The public deserves to know the findings of the Special Counsel investigation,
including whether and to what extent members of the president’s campaign aided in foreign efforts
to interfere in U.S. elections or attempts to obstruct justice. Further demonstrating the great public
interest in disclosure of the requested records, the president and many members of Congress have
expressed the belief that the public should be allowed to view the Mueller report and the findings
of the Special Counsel’s investigation.13 As discussed below, American Oversight has the capacity

9
10

28 C.F.R. § 16.10(k)(1).

Id.

28 C.F.R. § 16.10(k)(1), (2)(i)–(ii).
See, e.g., Katie Benner, Mueller Report Expected to Go to Justice Department Within Weeks,
N.Y. TIMES, Feb. 21, 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/21/us/politics/mueller-reportending.html; Philip Ewing, Here’s What May Happen When the Mueller Investigation Is
Completed, NPR (Feb. 22, 2019, 5:00 AM), https://www.npr.org/2019/02/22/696428301/hereswhat-may-happen-when-the-mueller-investigation-is-completed.
13
Nicholas Fandos, House Votes, 420-to-0, to Demand Public Release of Mueller Report, N.Y.
TIMES, Mar. 14, 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/14/us/politics/mueller-report11
12

4

DOJ-19-0375

 and intention to inform a broad audience about government activities that are the subject of these
records.
This request is primarily and fundamentally for non-commercial purposes.14 As a 501(c)(3)
nonprofit, American Oversight does not have a commercial purpose and the release of the
information requested is not in American Oversight’s financial interest. American Oversight’s
mission is to promote transparency in government, to educate the public about government
activities, and to ensure the accountability of government officials. American Oversight uses the
information gathered, and its analysis of it, to educate the public through reports, press releases, or
other media. American Oversight also makes materials it gathers available on its public website and
promotes their availability on social media platforms, such as Facebook and Twitter.15 American
Oversight has demonstrated its commitment to the public disclosure of documents and creation of
editorial content. For example, after receiving records regarding an ethics waiver received by a
senior DOJ attorney,16 American Oversight promptly posted the records to its website and
published an analysis of what the records reflected about DOJ’s process for ethics waivers.17 As
another example, American Oversight has a project called “Audit the Wall,” where the
organization is gathering and analyzing information and commenting on public releases of
information related to the administration’s proposed construction of a barrier along the U.S.Mexico border.18
Accordingly, American Oversight qualifies for a fee waiver.
Application for Expedited Processing

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E)(1) and 28 C.F.R. § 16.5(e)(1)(ii), (iv), American Oversight
requests that DOJ expedite the processing of this request.

public.html; Jill Colvin, Trump Says Public Should See ‘Ridiculous’ Mueller Report, AP NEWS,
Mar. 21, 2019, https://www.apnews.com/093727be24b649f7adad971e0b48878d.
14
28 C.F.R. § 16.10(k)(1), (2)(iii).
15
American Oversight currently has approximately 12,200 page likes on Facebook and 50,700
followers on Twitter. American Oversight, FACEBOOK, https://www.facebook.com/weareoversight/
(last visited Feb. 21, 2019); American Oversight (@weareoversight), TWITTER,
https://twitter.com/weareoversight (last visited Feb. 21, 2019).
16
DOJ Records Related to Solicitor General Noel Francisco’s Recusal, AMERICAN OVERSIGHT,
https://www.americanoversight.org/document/doj-civil-division-response-noel-franciscocompliance.
17
Francisco & the Travel Ban: What We Learned from the DOJ Documents, AMERICAN
OVERSIGHT, https://www.americanoversight.org/francisco-the-travel-ban-what-we-learned-from-thedoj-documents.
18
Audit the Wall, AMERICAN OVERSIGHT, https://www.americanoversight.org/investigation/auditthe-wall.

5

DOJ-19-0375

 I certify to be true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief that the information
requested is urgently needed in order to inform the public concerning actual or alleged
government activity.19 Special Counsel Robert Mueller has been conducting an investigation that
concerns the integrity of U.S. elections and the potential involvement of members of the
president’s campaign in aiding in foreign interference in a presidential election.20 There is
enormous public concern that recently-confirmed Attorney General William Barr will not
sufficiently disclose the findings of the Mueller investigation or take necessary action on the basis
of those findings.21 The public interest in disclosure of the requested information is particularly
important given now-Attorney General Barr’s June 8, 2018 memorandum to DOJ—and also sent
to President Trump’s attorneys—arguing against taking action on certain potential areas of the
Special Counsel’s investigation.22 Without prompt public disclosure of the Special Counsel’s
findings, public confidence in the Attorney General’s subsequent actions could be deeply shaken.
And only further serving to illustrate the urgent public need for disclosure of the Special Counsel’s
report, the chairs of six committees of the U.S. House of Representatives have urged the Attorney
General to make the report public.23 The president and many other members of Congress have
also shown that they believe the report and the Special Counsel’s findings should be made public.24
The American public has a substantial and urgent interest in understanding the findings of the
Special Counsel’s investigation.
I further certify that American Oversight is primarily engaged in disseminating information to the
public.25 American Oversight’s mission is to promote transparency in government, to educate the
public about government activities, and to ensure the accountability of government officials. Similar
to other organizations that have been found to satisfy the criteria necessary to qualify for
28 C.F.R. § 16.5(e)(1)(ii).
Order No. 3915-2017, APPOINTMENT OF A SPECIAL COUNSEL TO INVESTIGATE RUSSIAN
INTERFERENCE WITH THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AND RELATED MATTERS, May 17,
2017, https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/967231/download.
21
Todd Ruger, Senate Confirms Barr Amid Questions About Mueller Report, ROLL CALL (Feb.
14, 2019, 1:37 PM), https://www.rollcall.com/news/congress/senate-confirms-barr-amid-questionsabout-mueller-report; Mariam Khan & Luke Barr, William Barr Sworn in as Attorney General,
Will Oversee Mueller Investigation, ABC NEWS (Feb. 14, 2019, 5:19 PM),
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/william-barr-confirmed-senate-set-attorneygeneral/story?id=61047415; Eric Tucker, New Attorney General in Hot Seat as Mueller Report
Nears, AP NEWS (Feb. 22, 2019, 2:50 PM),
https://www.apnews.com/a63a668819624127a9f92e25c7c5b7bf.
22
Andrew Prokop, Trump’s Attorney General Nominee Wrote a Memo Expressing Deep
Suspicion of the Mueller Probe, VOX (Dec. 20, 2018, 12:30 PM), https://www.vox.com/policy-andpolitics/2018/12/20/18150165/mueller-barr-memo-rosenstein-obstruction-trump.
23
Olivia Beavers, Dems Press Barr to Make Mueller Report Public, THE HILL (Feb. 22, 2019,
3:45 PM), https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/431191-top-democrats-press-barr-aboutproviding-public-mueller-probe-report.
24
Fandos, supra note 13; Colvin, supra note 13.
25
28 C.F.R. § 16.5(e)(1)(iv).
19
20

6

DOJ-19-0375

 expedition,26 American Oversight “‘gathers information of potential interest to a segment of the
public, uses its editorial skills to turn the raw material into a distinct work, and distributes that work
to an audience.’”27 American Oversight uses the information gathered, and its analysis of it, to
educate the public through reports, press releases, and other media. American Oversight also
makes materials it gathers available on its public website and promotes their availability on social
media platforms, such as Facebook and Twitter.28 As discussed previously, American Oversight has
demonstrated its commitment to the public disclosure of documents and creation of editorial
content. 29
I further certify to be true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, that this request
concerns “a matter of widespread and exceptional media interest in which there exist possible
questions about the government's integrity that affect public confidence.” 28 C.F.R. § 16.5(e)(1)(iv).
The investigation of Special Counsel Robert Mueller into foreign interference in the 2016 U.S.
presidential election, any cooperation by the president’s campaign with the Russian government
regarding those efforts, and other matters has received extraordinarily “widespread and
exceptional” media coverage,30 and the release of the Special Counsel’s report and its contents

See ACLU v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 321 F. Supp. 2d 24, 30—31 (D.D.C. 2004); EPIC v. Dep’t of
Defense, 241 F. Supp. 2d 5, 15 (D.D.C. 2003).
ACLU, 321 F. Supp. 2d at 29 n.5 (quoting EPIC, 241 F. Supp. 2d at 11).
26

27

American Oversight currently has approximately 12,200 page likes on Facebook and 54,100
followers on Twitter. American Oversight, FACEBOOK, https://www.facebook.com/weareoversight
(last visited Mar. 22, 2019); American Oversight (@weareoversight), TWITTER,
https://twitter.com/weareoversight (last visited Mar. 22, 2019).
29
See DOJ Records Related to Solicitor General Noel Francisco’s Recusal, AMERICAN
OVERSIGHT, https://www.americanoversight.org/document/doj-civil-division-response-noelfrancisco-compliance; Francisco & the Travel Ban: What We Learned from the DOJ Documents,
AMERICAN OVERSIGHT, https://www.americanoversight.org/francisco-the-travel-ban-what-welearned-from-the-doj-documents; Audit the Wall, AMERICAN OVERSIGHT,
https://www.americanoversight.org/investigation/audit-the-wall.
30
See, e.g., Katelyn Polantz, Mueller Could Tell All in Last Major Court Filing in Paul Manafort’s
Case, CNN (Feb. 22, 2019, 7:22 AM), https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/22/politics/manafortsentecing-memo-preview/index.html; Andrew Prokop, The Mueller Investigation Has Gotten
Closer to Donald Trump, VOX (Dec. 6, 2018, 8:00 AM),
https://www.vox.com/2018/12/6/18120077/mueller-news-trump-russia-report; Philip Ewing, What
You Need to Know About the Latest Big News In The Mueller Investigation, NPR (Nov. 29,
2018, 5:18 PM), https://www.npr.org/2018/11/29/671939382/what-you-need-to-know-about-thelatest-big-news-in-the-mueller-russia-investigat; Eli Watkins, Mueller Investigating Trump for
Obstruction of Justice, Washington Post Reports, CNN (June 15, 2017, 7:13 AM),
https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/14/politics/robert-mueller-donald-trump/index.html; Devlin Barrett
et al., Special Counsel Is Investigating Trump for Possible Obstruction of Justice, Officials Say,
WASH. POST, June 14, 2017, https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/specialcounsel-is-investigating-trump-for-possible-obstruction-of-justice/2017/06/14/9ce02506-5131-11e7b064-828ba60fbb98_story.html?utm_term=.70c32aeb7b6c.
28

7

DOJ-19-0375

 specifically have received extensive coverage.31 And Special Counsel Mueller’s report directly
concerns important questions about the government’s integrity that affect public confidence, as the
Special Counsel’s investigation has involved a probe of the integrity of the 2016 presidential
election and the potential involvement of the president or members of his campaign in aiding
foreign efforts to interfere in that election or attempting to obstruct an investigation into that
interference.32 Public confidence in DOJ could be undermined if the public is not able to assess
the findings of the Special Counsel report.
Accordingly, American Oversight’s request satisfies the criteria for expedition.
Conclusion

We share a common mission to promote transparency in government. American Oversight looks
forward to working with your agency on this request. If you do not understand any part of this
request, have any questions, or foresee any problems in fully releasing the requested records,
please contact Dan McGrath at foia@americanoversight.org or 202.897.4213. Also, if American
Oversight’s request for a fee waiver is not granted in full, please contact us immediately upon
making such a determination.
Sincerely,

Austin R. Evers
Executive Director
American Oversight
Cc: Kerri Kupec

Katie Benner, Mueller Report Expected to Go to Justice Department Within Weeks, N.Y.
TIMES, Feb. 21, 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/21/us/politics/mueller-reportending.html; Devlin Barrett et al., Justice Department Preparing for Mueller Report in Coming
Days, WASH. POST, Feb. 20, 2019, https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nationalsecurity/justice-department-preparing-for-mueller-report-in-coming-days/2019/02/20/c472691c354b-11e9-af5b-b51b7ff322e9_story.html?utm_term=.6737a54ea838; Devin Barrett, Mueller
Report Is ‘Close to Being Completed,’ Acting Attorney General Says, WASH. POST, Jan. 28, 2019,
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/mueller-investigation-is-close-to-beingcompleted-acting-attorney-general-says/2019/01/28/6bcf09b4-2349-11e9-81fdb7b05d5bed90_story.html?utm_term=.4e7876dafbb1.
32
See id; see also Order No. 3915-2017, supra note 19.
31

8

DOJ-19-0375