Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00007/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00007-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 895
Nature of Suit: Freedom of Information Act of 1974
Cause of Action: 05:552 Freedom of Information Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRUCE TURNER,

Plaintiff,

v.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE 

TREASURY,

Defendant.

_____________________________________/

Case No. 1:15-cv-00007-LJO-SKO

ORDER AUTHORIZING SERVICE OF 

COMPLAINT ON DEFENDANT 

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO 

FORWARD SERVICE DOCUMENTS TO 

PLAINTIFF FOR COMPLETION AND 

RETURN WITHIN THIRTY DAYS

I. INTRODUCTION

On January 5, 2014, Plaintiff Bruce Turner ("Plaintiff") filed a complaint against the U.S. 

Department of the Treasury seeking access to documents pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B). 

Plaintiff is currently incarcerated and is proceeding in forma pauperis and pro se. For the reasons 

set forth below, Plaintiff's complaint states a cognizable claim for access to agency documents 

pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA").

II. BACKGROUND

Plaintiff alleges that he filed a FOIA request with the Financial Crimes Enforcement 

Network ("FinCen"), a bureau of the United States Department of the Treasury. Plaintiff 

requested records concerning himself: bank records from Bank of America regarding his savings 

Case 1:15-cv-00007-DAD-SKO Document 6 Filed 04/06/15 Page 1 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

account for the period of January 1993 through December 1994; reproduction of checks and other 

instruments; record of transactions; receipt of funds; and a copy of the currency Transaction 

Report in the sum of $100,000. (Doc. 1, p. 6.)

On December 8, 2014, Plaintiff received a letter from the FinCen denying Plaintiff's 

October 5, 2014, appeal of the agency's denial of his FOIA request. The letter informed Plaintiff 

that he could obtain judicial review in a district court where he resides pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 

552(a)(4)(B).

III. DISCUSSION

A. Legal Standard

"FOIA entitles private citizens to access government records." Minier v. Cent. Intelligence 

Agency, 88 F.3d 796, 800 (9th Cir. 1996). "The Supreme Court has interpreted the disclosure 

provisions broadly, noting that the act was animated by a 'philosophy of full agency disclosure.'" 

Lion Raisins v. U.S. Dep't of Agric., 354 F.3d 1072, 1079 (9th Cir. 2004) (quoting John Doe 

Agency v. John Doe Corp., 493 U.S. 146, 152 (1989)). FOIA, however, contains nine exemptions 

which a government agency may invoke to protect certain documents from public disclosure. See 

id. "Unlike the disclosure provisions of FOIA, its statutory exemptions 'must be narrowly 

construed.'" Id. (internal quotation and citation omitted).

The agencies resisting public disclosure have "the burden of proving the applicability of an 

exemption." Minier, 88 F.3d at 800. "That burden remains with the agency when it seeks to 

justify the redaction of identifying information in a particular document as well as when it seeks to 

withhold an entire document." U.S. Dep't of State v. Ray, 502 U.S. 164, 173 (1991). An agency 

"may meet its burden by submitting a detailed affidavit showing that the information logically 

falls within the claimed exemptions." Minier, 88 F.3d at 800 (internal quotation marks and 

citations omitted).

B. Screening Standard

Title 28 of the United States Code, Section 1915A provides that "[t]he court shall review, 

before docketing, if feasible or, in any event, as soon as practicable after docketing, a complaint in 

a civil action in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee 

Case 1:15-cv-00007-DAD-SKO Document 6 Filed 04/06/15 Page 2 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

of a governmental entity." 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). "On review, the court shall identify cognizable 

claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the complaint (1) is frivolous, 

malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or (2) seeks monetary relief 

from a defendant who is immune from such relief." Id. at § 1915A(b)(1)-(2). 

In determining whether a complaint fails to state a claim, the Court uses the same pleading 

standard used under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a). Under Rule 8(a), a complaint must 

contain a "short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). "[T]he pleading standard Rule 8 announces does not require 'detailed 

factual allegations,' but it demands more than an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me 

accusation." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 

550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). "[A] complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as

true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'" Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 

557). "[A] complaint [that] pleads facts that are 'merely consistent with' a defendant's liability . . . 

'stops short of the line between possibility and plausibility of entitlement to relief.'" Id. (quoting 

Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557). Although a court must accept as true all factual allegations contained 

in a complaint, a court need not accept a plaintiff's legal conclusions as true. Id. "Threadbare 

recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not 

suffice." Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555).

C. Plaintiff's Complaint States a Cognizable Claim under FOIA

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B), 

On complaint, the district court of the United States in the district in which the 

complainant resides, or has his principal place of business, or in which the agency 

records are situated, or in the District of Columbia, has jurisdiction to enjoin the 

agency from withholding agency records and to order the production of any agency 

records improperly withheld from the complainant . . . . .

Because Plaintiff has requested and has been denied access to agency documents, Plaintiff 

has pled a cognizable claim under the FOIA for full disclosure of the requested agency documents. 

As to FOIA's exhaustion requirement, Plaintiff has alleged that he completed the appeal process, 

and attached the denial letter of December 8, 2014, to his complaint.

Case 1:15-cv-00007-DAD-SKO Document 6 Filed 04/06/15 Page 3 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4

IV. CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Plaintiff's claim against the U.S. Department of the Treasury pursuant to FOIA is 

cognizable. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to send Plaintiff a USM-285 form, one

summons, an instruction sheet, a notice of submission of documents form, and 

one copy of the complaint filed on January 5, 2015;

2. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff is 

DIRECTED to complete the attached notice of submission of documents and to 

submit the completed notice to the Court with the following documents:

a. The completed summons;

b. One completed USM-285 form for the defendant listed above; 

c. One copy of the endorsed complaint filed in this Court; and

3. Service upon the Defendant is appropriate when the service documents are 

submitted to the Court and forwarded to the United States Marshal. Plaintiff need 

not attempt service on defendant.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 3, 2015 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00007-DAD-SKO Document 6 Filed 04/06/15 Page 4 of 4