50 U.S.C. § 403q
Transferred
[transferred]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 2008–2011 · leading case: Binyam Mohamed v. Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc., 614 F.3d 1070 (9th Cir. 2010).
Binyam Mohamed v. Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc., 614 F.3d 1070 (9th Cir. 2010). “, 50 U.S.C. § 403q (establishing the Office of Inspector General in the Central Intelligence Agency “to initiate and conduct independently inspections, investigations, and audits relating to programs and operations of the Agency”); see also Office of Inspector General, Central…”
Feldman v. Cent. Intelligence Agency, 797 F. Supp. 2d 29 (D.D.C. 2011). “” 50 U.S.C. § 403q(a)(4). Since the CIA OIG has a statutory obligation to inform the SSCI of “significant problems and deficiencies,” and fulfilling that obligation is considered a routine use of Privacy Act-protected records, the mere allegation that a staffer on that committee…”
Boening v. Cent. Intelligence Agency, 579 F. Supp. 2d 166 (D.D.C. 2008). “On May 10, 2001, Plaintiff submitted a memorandum (“Memorandum” or “M Complaint”) with three annexes and a bibliography to the CIA’s Office of Inspector General (“OIG”) as a whistle-blower complaint for review as an “urgent concern” under section 17(d)(5) of the CIA Act, 50…”
Binyam Mohamed v. Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc. (9th Cir. 2010). “, 50 U.S.C. § 403q (establishing the Office of Inspector General in the Central Intelligence Agency “to initiate and conduct independently inspections, investigations, and audits relating to programs and operations of the Agency”); see also Office of Inspector General, Central…”
Feldman v. Cent. Intelligence Agency (D.D.C. 2011). “” 50 U.S.C. § 403q(a)(4). Since the CIA OIG has a statutory obligation to inform the SSCI of “significant problems and deficiencies,” and fulfilling that obligation is considered a routine use of Privacy Act-protected records, the mere allegation that a staffer on that committee…”
— 50 U.S.C. § 403q(a)(4) — 2 cases
Feldman v. Cent. Intelligence Agency, 797 F. Supp. 2d 29 (D.D.C. 2011). “” 50 U.S.C. § 403q(a)(4). Since the CIA OIG has a statutory obligation to inform the SSCI of “significant problems and deficiencies,” and fulfilling that obligation is considered a routine use of Privacy Act-protected records, the mere allegation that a staffer on that committee…”
Feldman v. Cent. Intelligence Agency (D.D.C. 2011). “” 50 U.S.C. § 403q(a)(4). Since the CIA OIG has a statutory obligation to inform the SSCI of “significant problems and deficiencies,” and fulfilling that obligation is considered a routine use of Privacy Act-protected records, the mere allegation that a staffer on that committee…”
— 50 U.S.C. § 403q(d)(5) — 1 case
Boening v. Cent. Intelligence Agency, 579 F. Supp. 2d 166 (D.D.C. 2008). “On May 10, 2001, Plaintiff submitted a memorandum (“Memorandum” or “M Complaint”) with three annexes and a bibliography to the CIA’s Office of Inspector General (“OIG”) as a whistle-blower complaint for review as an “urgent concern” under section 17(d)(5) of the CIA Act, 50…”
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.