<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>Poulsen v. US</title>
 <link>http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/taxonomy/term/304/feed</link>
 <description>The taxonomy view with a depth of 0.</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>Proposal would require Tracking Numbers for FOIA requests</title>
 <link>http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/node/5238</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;According to National Journal&#039;s Technology Daily:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;The House Oversight and Government Reform Information Policy Subcommittee on Tuesday approved legislation that aims to speed the government&#039;s response to Freedom of Information Act requests. CongressDaily reports that the legislation would uphold an existing requirement that government agencies respond to information requests within 20 days but would apply pressure to that deadline by imposing consequences on federal agencies for missing it. The bill also would mandate that agencies provide information requesters with a tracking number to follow the progress of their request either by phone or on the Internet. &quot;Requesters are being forced to wait much longer than necessary for responses from agency FOIA offices,&quot; said bill co-sponsor and Missouri Democrat William Lacy Clay.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;One of the big problems the journalist in &lt;a href=&quot;http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/case/poulsen-v-us&quot;&gt;Poulsen v. USCBP&lt;/a&gt; had was that the agency never gave him a tracking number and then claimed they lost his FOIA request.  Hopefully this could solve that problem.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/node/5238&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/node/5238#comment</comments>
 <category domain="http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/taxonomy/term/375">privacy</category>
 <category domain="http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/case/poulsen-v-us">Poulsen v. US</category>
 <category domain="http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/freetags/foia">FOIA</category>
 <pubDate>Fri, 09 Mar 2007 10:36:53 -0800</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Lauren Gelman</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">5238 at http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Victory in Poulsen FOIA case</title>
 <link>http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/node/5103</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;In April of 2006, &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/&quot;&gt;Wired News editor Kevin Poulsen&lt;/a&gt; sued the United States Customs and Border Patrol under the Freedom of Information Act.  Poulsen won the case, and yesterday the trial court granted Poulsen $66,000 in attorney&#039;s fees.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/node/5103&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/node/5103#comment</comments>
 <category domain="http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/taxonomy/term/376">free speech</category>
 <category domain="http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/case/poulsen-v-us">Poulsen v. US</category>
 <category domain="http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/freetags/foia">FOIA</category>
 <category domain="http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/freetags/free-press">free press</category>
 <category domain="http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/freetags/national-security">national security</category>
 <category domain="http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/freetags/vulnerability-disclosure">vulnerability disclosure</category>
 <enclosure url="http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/system/files/PoulsenMotionFeesOrder.pdf" length="182200" type="application/pdf" />
 <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jan 2007 11:03:26 -0800</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Jennifer Granick</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">5103 at http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Poulsen Files Motion For Attorney&#039;s Fees After Successful Action</title>
 <link>http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/node/5044</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) includes a fee-shifting provision to incentivize private individuals to bring FOIA compliance actions. An award of fees is not automatic, rather, a FOIA plaintiff must have been successful in the action and must also be entitled to fees.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Following the favorable judgment obtained on September 26, 2006, we promptly stipulated for an extension of the fourteen day window with which to file our motion. The brief window is defined by N.D.C.A. local rules. We compiled all the records of our time and promptly contacted the Assistant US Attorney to negotiate a settlement in the hopes of avoiding further litigation. Unfortunately, these negotiations were largely unsuccessful, leaving us no alternative but to draft and file a motion.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/node/5044&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/node/5044#comment</comments>
 <category domain="http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/case/poulsen-v-us">Poulsen v. US</category>
 <category domain="http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/freetags/attorneys-fees">attorney&amp;#039;s fees</category>
 <category domain="http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/freetags/foia">FOIA</category>
 <category domain="http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/freetags/freedom-of-information-act">freedom of information act</category>
 <enclosure url="http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/system/files/Motion+for+Award+of+Atty+Filing+Copy.pdf" length="65705" type="application/pdf" />
 <pubDate>Tue, 05 Dec 2006 10:21:27 -0800</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Jeff Laretto</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">5044 at http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Motion for Fees Filed in Poulsen FOIA case</title>
 <link>http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/node/3129</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;We Filed our Motion for attorney&#039;s fees in the Poulsen FOIA case.  FOIA includes a fee-shifting provision to encourage people to litigate to defend their rights-- when the government loses, it has to pay the other side&#039;s costs if they &quot;substantially prevailed&quot; and meet the test that they are entitled to fees.  We&#039;re asking for ~$70,000 dollars to cover our litigation costs and attorneys fees and believe we should get all of it given the government&#039;s obdurate behavior in the case.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <comments>http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/node/3129#comment</comments>
 <category domain="http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/taxonomy/term/375">privacy</category>
 <category domain="http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/case/poulsen-v-us">Poulsen v. US</category>
 <category domain="http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/freetags/foia">FOIA</category>
 <enclosure url="http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/system/files/Motion+for+Award+of+Atty+FILING+COPY.pdf" length="84141" type="application/pdf" />
 <pubDate>Tue, 07 Nov 2006 16:17:25 -0800</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Lauren Gelman</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">3129 at http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Complaint Filed</title>
 <link>http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/about/cases/003910.shtml</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Student Megan Adams drafted and filed &lt;a href=&quot;http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/about/cases/Poulsen%20Complaint.pdf&quot;&gt;this complaint&lt;/a&gt; alleging that CBP failed to comply with the FOIA by failing to conduct an adequate search and wrongfully witholding documents.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <comments>http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/about/cases/003910.shtml#comment</comments>
 <category domain="http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/case/poulsen-v-us">Poulsen v. US</category>
 <pubDate>Tue, 11 Apr 2006 22:06:24 -0700</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Lauren Gelman</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">2977 at http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
