Freedom of Information Act Litigation (H-1B)

The reliability and fairness of our immigration system can be evaluated only if the government’s procedures and activities are transparent. The LAC regularly uses the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to increase transparency and promote accountability regarding DHS enforcement practices.

On behalf of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), the LAC, in cooperation with counsel at Steptoe & Johnson LLP, has filed a FOIA lawsuit against DHS and USCIS seeking the public release of records concerning agency policies and procedures related to fraud investigations in the H-1B program. There is significant public interest in these records because USCIS’s H-1B practices have caused confusion and concern among U.S. businesses that legitimately depend on temporary foreign workers with specialized knowledge to operate successfully.

CASES | RESOURCES

CASES

AILA v. DHS, No. 10-01224 (D.D.C. filed July 20, 2010)

The complaint alleged that defendants violated FOIA when they wrongfully withheld information responsive to two FOIA requests and failed to timely respond to AILA’s requests. The complaint asked the court to enjoin defendants from continuing to withhold information relevant to the requests, to declare the requested records are not exempt from disclosure, and to award any other relief that the court deems just and equitable. Read our statement regarding the complaint.

After the lawsuit was filed, defendants released eight pages of heavily redacted documents and filed a motion for summary judgment. Plaintiffs responded with a cross-motion for summary judgment, which prompted defendants to withdraw their motion and request additional time to search for responsive documents. Defendants subsequently released additional records.

In late May 2011, AILA renewed its motion for summary judgment, arguing that defendants continue to improperly withhold responsive documents and have failed to segregate and release portions of previously disclosed and newly identified redacted documents.

In late June 2011, defendants responded to AILA’s motion for summary judgment with a cross-motion for summary judgment and filed an opposition to plaintiff’s statement of material facts not in genuine dispute. Plaintiff’s replied to Defendant’s cross-motion in late July. Defendants responded to plaintiff’s reply in early August.

• Press Release
• Complaint with initial FOIA requests and agency responses
• Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment
• Plaintiff’s Memorandum in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment and in Support of Plaintiff’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment
• Defendant’s Motion to Withdraw Motion for Summary Judgment
• Plaintiff’s Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment
• Defendants’ Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment
• Defendants’ Memorandum in Support of Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment
• Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiff’s Statement of Material Facts Not in Genuine Dispute
• Plaintiff’s Reply Memorandum in Support of its Motion for Summary Judgment and in Opposition to Defendant’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment
• Plaintiff's Response to Defendants' Statement of Material Facts Not in Genuine Dispute and Plaintiff's Statement of Genuine Material Issues.
• Defendants’ Reply to Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendant’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment

RESOURCES

LAC Litigation Issue Page: Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)