C.F.R. » Title 6 » CHAPTER I—DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY › PART 5—DISCLOSURE OF RECORDS AND INFORMATION › Subpart A—Procedures for Disclosure of Records Under the Freedom of Information Act

6 C.F.R. § 5.9

Preservation of records

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

Each component shall preserve all correspondence pertaining to the requests that it receives under this subpart, as well as copies of all requested records, until disposition or destruction is authorized pursuant to title 44 of the United States Code or the General Records Schedule 4.2 and/or 14 of the National Archives and Records Administration. Records will not be disposed of or destroyed while they are the subject of a pending request, appeal, or lawsuit under the FOIA.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 2011–2019 · leading case: Elec. Privacy Info. Ctr. v. United States Dep't of Homeland Sec., 218 F. Supp. 3d 27 (D.D.C. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Elec. Privacy Info. Ctr. v. United States Dep't of Homeland Sec., 218 F. Supp. 3d 27 (D.D.C. 2016). · cites it 3× “” 6 C.F.R. § 5.9 (a)(1). EPIC appealed NPPD’s failure to respond to categories 1-4 of EPIC’s FOIA request, but did not appeal DHS’s determination that it lacked records for category 5 of the request.”
Am. Civil Liberties Union v. United States Dep't of Homeland Sec., 810 F. Supp. 2d 267 (D.D.C. 2011). “26 (December 7, 2007 letter from Tom Jawetz to the Associate General Counsel (General Law), Department of Homeland Security) at 1, which was denied on January 4, 2008, because the request was filed “well past the 60[-]day filing requirement” under 6 C.F.R. § 5.9 (a), id., Ex. 27…”
Rosenberg v. United States Dep't of Immigr. & Customs Enf't, 956 F. Supp. 2d 32 (D.D.C. 2013). · cites it 2× “Pursuant to 6 C.F.R. § 5.9 (a)(3), ICE administratively closed the Plaintiffs appeal after he filed suit.”
Hajro v. United States Citizenship & Immigr. Servs., 832 F. Supp. 2d 1095 (N.D. Cal. 2011). “Hajro separately appealed the denial for expedited processing pursuant to 6 C.F.R. § 5.9 (a)(1). USCIS denied the administrative appeal on the same ground as the original application, citing Hajro’s failure to qualify under 6 C.”
Heartland All. for Human Needs & Human Rights v. United States Immigr. & Customs Enf't, No. 2016-0204 (D.D.C. Sept. 12, 2019). “(citing 6 C.F.R. § 5.9 (a)(1) (2015)); see also Pineiro Decl.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.