Fourth Circuit Clarifies Constructive Exhaustion in FOIA:
Post-Lawsuit Partial Productions Neither Moot the Action nor Revive Administrative-Appeal Requirements

Introduction

Louise Trauma Center LLC (“LTC”) brought suit against the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) after the agency ignored four Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests relating to the training and performance of asylum officers. Two years of silence forced LTC to litigate. Only then did USCIS belatedly release 2,756 pages—many heavily redacted—before moving to dismiss. The District Court sided with the government, holding that (1) LTC had not exhausted its administrative remedies and (2) the action was moot because responsive documents had been “produced.”

On appeal, the Fourth Circuit reversed. In a published opinion authored by Judge Berner and joined by Chief Judge Diaz and Judge Harris, the court laid down an important rule: When an agency violates FOIA’s statutory time limits, the requester constructively exhausts administrative remedies, and any post-suit partial production does not moot the case nor re-impose an obligation to pursue agency appeals over redactions.

Summary of the Judgment

• Constructive Exhaustion: Because USCIS failed to issue a timely “determination,” LTC was deemed to have exhausted administrative remedies under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(C)(i).
• No Mootness: The case remains live; partial production with extensive redactions is not equivalent to “full compliance” and therefore does not moot a FOIA action.
• No New Exhaustion Obligation: Once constructive exhaustion accrues and litigation commences, an agency cannot force the requester back into the administrative process by dribbling out records.
• District Court Error: Exhaustion under FOIA is not jurisdictional; dismissing under Rule 12(b)(1) on that ground was incorrect.
• Outcome: District Court judgment reversed; case remanded for merits proceedings on adequacy of USCIS’s search and propriety of claimed exemptions.

Analysis

1. Precedents Cited

The opinion draws heavily on both Fourth Circuit and sister-circuit FOIA jurisprudence:

1. Coleman v. Drug Enforcement Administration, 714 F.3d 816 (4th Cir. 2013) – establishes constructive exhaustion when statutory deadlines are missed.
2. Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington v. Federal Election Commission, 711 F.3d 180 (D.C. Cir. 2013) – partial production does not moot a suit that also challenges improper withholdings.
3. Regional Management Corp. v. Legal Services Corp., 186 F.3d 457 (4th Cir. 1999) – contrasted; mootness follows only when complete production occurs.
4. Khine v. DHS, 943 F.3d 959 (D.C. Cir. 2019) – defines what constitutes a proper “determination.”
5. Pollack v. Department of Justice, 49 F.3d 115 (4th Cir. 1995) and Corbett v. TSA, 116 F.4th 1024 (9th Cir. 2024) – articulate that post-suit agency responses do not defeat constructive exhaustion.
6. Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81 (2006) – general exhaustion doctrine context.

By weaving these authorities, the court clarified an area previously clouded by district-level inconsistency—particularly on whether new appeals must be taken after post-complaint releases.

2. The Court’s Legal Reasoning

• Textual Interpretation of FOIA Deadlines. Section (a)(6)(A)(i) obliges an agency to make a “determination” within 20 business days (plus a permissible 10-day extension). USCIS’s boiler-plate acknowledgments were insufficient because a valid determination must (i) identify responsive records, (ii) signal what will be withheld and why, and (iii) advise of appeal rights.
• Constructive Exhaustion as Congressional Remedy. Congress intended constructive exhaustion as a “penalty” to prevent agencies from stonewalling. Once triggered, the statute authorizes immediate judicial review.
• Mootness Doctrine Distilled. A FOIA controversy ends only when the agency has fully satisfied the request. Where extensive redactions remain contested, the requester retains a “personal stake” in the outcome, preserving Article III jurisdiction.
• Non-Jurisdictional Nature of FOIA Exhaustion. The panel relied on Stewart v. Iancu, 912 F.3d 693 (4th Cir. 2019) to reaffirm that statutory exhaustion must be “clearly stated” to be jurisdictional—FOIA lacks such language.
• Policy Considerations. Requiring renewed appeals after suit would incentivize agencies to delay, undermining FOIA’s purposes of transparency and timely disclosure.

3. Potential Impact

This precedential opinion will reverberate across FOIA litigation within the Fourth Circuit and potentially beyond:

• Litigation Strategy: Requesters can file suit promptly after the 20/30-day window lapses without fear that belated document dumps will derail their case.
• Agency Practice: Agencies operating within the Fourth Circuit must expedite determinations to avoid losing the procedural advantage of administrative exhaustion defenses.
• Judicial Efficiency: The ruling deters piecemeal productions designed to whittle away lawsuits and promotes merits-based adjudication of claimed exemptions.
• Inter-Circuit Dialogue: The case aligns the Fourth Circuit with the D.C. and Ninth Circuits, reducing forum-shopping incentives and moving the law toward uniformity.
• Transparency Values: The decision strengthens FOIA’s core promise by closing a loophole that allowed agencies to “game” the exhaustion requirement.

Complex Concepts Simplified

FOIA “Determination”

A formal agency response that tells the requester which documents will be released, which will be withheld, the exemptions relied upon, and how to appeal. A mere “we got your letter” acknowledgment is insufficient.

Constructive Exhaustion

Legal fiction by which a requester is deemed to have completed the administrative process because the agency missed FOIA’s response deadline. It unlocks immediate access to the courts.

Mootness in FOIA

A case is moot only if the agency has fully satisfied the requester’s demands—including unredacted release unless exemptions legitimately apply. Partial disclosure keeps the controversy alive.

Jurisdictional vs. Claim-Processing Rule

If Congress intends a procedural step to limit the court’s power, it must do so unmistakably. FOIA’s exhaustion requirement is instead a “claim-processing” rule—waived or overridden by constructive exhaustion.

Gamesmanship Concern

The court’s term for strategic agency behavior—delaying responses to coax litigation dismissal. The opinion aims to remove incentives for such tactics.

Conclusion

Louise Trauma Center LLC v. USCIS establishes a robust barrier against agency dilatory tactics in FOIA practice. The Fourth Circuit confirmed that:

1. Silence past the statutory deadline equals constructive exhaustion;
2. Partial, post-complaint productions do not moot the case; and
3. Agencies cannot re-impose administrative-appeal requirements mid-litigation.

This trio of holdings advances the transparency objectives of FOIA, ensures meaningful judicial oversight, and harmonizes Fourth Circuit doctrine with persuasive authority from other circuits. Future requesters can invoke this precedent to secure timely, complete, and unredacted access to public information—bolstering accountability for federal agencies and, ultimately, fostering a more open government.