§Why CasetextPricing

Electronic Privacy Information Center v. the United States Deptment of Homeland Security

REPLY to opposition to motion re MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re Complaint and Notice in Opposition to Entry of Default

11 Cited authorities

  1. Jackson v. Beech

    636 F.2d 831 (D.C. Cir. 1980)   Cited 656 times
    Holding that all doubts are to be resolved in favor of the party seeking relief thus increasing the likelihood that disputes will be resolved on their merits

  2. Dow v. Jones

    232 F. Supp. 2d 491 (D. Md. 2002)   Cited 315 times
    Holding that the balance of factors was even and deferring to plaintiff's choice to litigate at home

  3. James Madison Project v. Central Intelligence Agency

    607 F. Supp. 2d 109 (D.D.C. 2009)   Cited 12 times
    Finding an agency's withholding under the low 2 exemption adequate, because the agency's declaration detailed the information withheld "document-by-document" and did not rely on "vague references"

  4. Biton v. Palestinian Interim Self Government Authority

    233 F. Supp. 2d 31 (D.D.C. 2002)   Cited 14 times
    Holding that, in assessing the factual circumstances asserted by the parties, in context of a motion to set aside default, all doubts are resolved in favor of the party seeking relief.

  5. Guthery v. U.S.

    507 F. Supp. 2d 111 (D.D.C. 2007)   Cited 6 times
    Dismissing all other claims not related to collection

  6. ABI Investment Group v. FDIC

    860 F. Supp. 911 (D.N.H. 1994)   Cited 2 times

    Civ. No. 92-562-JD. July 19, 1994. Dean B. Eggert, Wadleigh, Starr, Peters, Dunn Chiesa, Manchester, NH, for ABI Inv. Group and Robert S. Audley. John T. Alexander, Ransmeier Spellman, Gretchen Leah Witt, US Attorney's Office, Concord, NH, Anne G. Scheer, Gallagher, Callahan Gartrell, P.A., Concord, NH, Dina L. Biblin, F.D.I.C., Washington, DC, for F.D.I.C. Joseph F. Shea, Nutter, McClennan Fish, Steven N. Fuller, Peabody Brown, Boston, MA, for Banc One. ORDER DiCLERICO, Chief Judge. The plaintiffs

  7. Brown v. Weschler

    135 F. Supp. 622 (D.D.C. 1955)   Cited 23 times

    No. 2616-55. November 7, 1955. Andrew W. Carroll, Washington, D.C., for plaintiff. Harry L. Ryan, Jr., Washington, D.C., for defendant. LAWS, Chief Judge. On June 10, 1955, plaintiff brought suit in the Municipal Court for the District of Columbia against the United States Marshal for the District of Columbia, two of his deputies, and three other defendants, Delores Pippin, Benjamin E. Weschler and Ralph A. Weschler, Jr. Personal service was made on the Marshal and his two deputies on June 10, 1955

  8. Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 12   Cited 344,767 times   920 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  9. Rule 4 - Summons

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 4   Cited 68,608 times   121 Legal Analyses
    Holding that if defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on a motion, or on its own following notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made by a certain time

  10. Rule 55 - Default; Default Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 55   Cited 32,636 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Adopting similar language for acquiring default judgment against the United States

  11. Section 552 - Public information; agency rules, opinions, orders, records, and proceedings

    5 U.S.C. § 552   Cited 12,152 times   556 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Court's entering of a “Stipulation and Order” approving the parties' terms of dismissal did not amount to a “court-ordered consent decree” that would render the plaintiff the prevailing party