ECF No. 1 Complaint 23-Cv-3798

Case 1:23-cv-03798 Document 1 Filed 12/21/23 Page 1 of 12
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION )

214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE )
Washington, D.C. 20002; )
) Civil Action No. 23-cv-3798
)
MIKE HOWELL )
214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE )
Washington, D.C. 20002 )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. )
)
U.S. DEPARTMENT )
OF DEFENSE )
1400 Defense Pentagon )
Washington, D.C. 20301 )
)
Defendant. )
____________________________________)
COMPLAINT
COMES NOW Plaintiffs Heritage Foundation (“Heritage”) and Mike Howell (collectively
“Plaintiffs”) to bring this action against Defendant the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
(“DOD” or “Defendant”) to compel compliance with the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”),
5 U.S.C. § 552. In support thereof, Plaintiffs state the following:
1. In September 2023 DOD’s United States Southern Command (“SOUTHCOM”)
cancelled two scheduled showings of the movie “Sound of Freedom.” The movie, which depicts
the horrors of sex trafficking and efforts by its protagonist to rescue children from sex trafficking
in the Americas and the Caribbean was originally set to be screened in August and October, 2023
at SOUTHCOM headquarters. Pursuant to news sources, “all locally based military personnel”
were invited to attend. Ellen Mitchell, Rubio presses military to reschedule canceled showings of
‘Sound of Freedom,’ The Hill, (Sept. 13, 2023, 3:33PM),
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4202812-rubio-presses-military-to-rescheduled-canceled-
showings-of-sound-of-freedom/. (Ex. 1).
2. Citing regulations “governing the use of materials subject to copyright and
intellectual property laws,” SOUTHCOM leadership ultimately chose to cancel the screenings.
Id.; Michael Lee, Military base abruptly cancels ‘Sound of Freedom’ screening, baffling producer,
FoxNews (Sept. 18, 2023, 1:02pm), https://www.foxnews.com/us/military-base-abruptly-cancels-
sound-of-freedom-screening-baffling-producer. (Ex. 2). SOUTHCOM did not elaborate on the
basis for the “copyright and intellectual property” concerns. Id. Indeed, the producers of Sound
of Freedom later consented to a rescheduled screening and offered to send a “representative” to
the screening in order to vitiate any possibly copyright or intellectual property concerns. Id.
SOUTHCOM routinely works with partners in Central and South America, as well as the
Caribbean to combat human trafficking and associated transnational criminal organizations, it has
a vested interest in ensuring that its personnel are well-aware of issues surrounding human
trafficking in the region. While this movie does not purport to be a definitive guide on such issues,
it is highly relevant to SOUTHCOM’s operational mission.
3. Senator Marco Rubio wrote to SOUTHCOM on September 13, 2023, urging
SOUTHCOM to reschedule the planned screenings. Letter from Hon. Marco Rubio to General
Laura Richardson (Sept. 13, 2023) (Ex. 3). Senator Rubio explained in detail:
While reporting suggests that SOUTHCOM unexpectedly cancelled the movie due to
concerns about “copyright infringement,” I am aware that its producers and the studio
have communicated that this is not an impediment for the movie to be shown at
SOUTHCOM to service members and their families. As such, since the concern which
2
led to the cancellation has now been addressed, I urge you to rectify this situation and
ensure that the screenings of the film be rescheduled without delay.
Id. at 1.
4. On information and belief SOUTHCOM has never screened Sound of Freedom.
5. Plaintiffs’ FOIA request sought transparency on SOUTHCOM leadership’s
reasoning to cancel the screenings. Plaintiffs seek to understand the basis for SOUTHCOM’s
decision and to determine whether factors outside of the stated reasons played a role in the
cancellation and subsequent refusal to reschedule the screening. The American people deserve to
know whether this decision was motivated by political concerns or other factors apart from issues
of copyright law and intellectual property.
PARTIES
6. Plaintiff The Heritage Foundation is a Washington, D.C.-based nonpartisan public
policy organization with a national and international reputation whose mission is to “formulate
and promote public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government,
individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.” Heritage
Foundation, About Heritage, found at https://www.heritage.org/about-heritage/mission (last
visited Dec. 18, 2023). Heritage is a not-for-profit section 501(c)(3) organization which engages
in substantial dissemination of information to the public. Heritage operates a national news outlet,
The Daily Signal.
7. Plaintiff Mike Howell leads The Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project and is an
author for The Daily Signal. The Oversight Project is an initiative aimed at obtaining information
via Freedom of Information Act requests and other means in order to best inform the public and
Congress for the purposes of Congressional oversight. The requests and analysis of
information are informed by Heritage’s deep policy expertise. By function, the Oversight
3
Project is primarily engaged in disseminating information to the public. See, e.g., Oversight
Project, found at https://www.heritage.org/oversight (last visited Dec. 18, 2023); X, found at
@OversightPR (last visited Dec. 18, 2023). Staff for the Oversight Project routinely appear on
television, radio, print, and other forms of media to provide expert commentary on salient issues
in the national debate.
8. Defendant DOD is a federal agency of the United States within the meaning of 5
U.S.C. § 552(f)(1) whose mission is to “provide the military forces needed to deter war and ensure
our nation’s security.” About DOD, found at https://www.defense.gov/About (last visited Dec. 18,
2023). SOUTHCOM is one of the eleven unified Combatant Commands of DOD. Relevant to
the herein matter, SOUTHCOM is charged with “ . . . working with our allied partner nations, and
U.S. government (USG) team members to enhance security and defend the U.S. homeland and our
national interests.” See U.S. Southern Command, About US, found at
https://www.southcom.mil/About/ (last visited Dec. 18, 2023). That work includes combatting
human trafficking and associated international criminal organizations. Upon information and
belief, DOD has in its possession, custody, and control records to which Plaintiffs seeks access.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
9. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B) and
28 U.S.C. § 1331.
10. Venue lies in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1391(e).
11. Plaintiffs seek declaratory relief under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201–2202 and Rule 57 of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
4
STATEMENT OF FACTS
12. On or about September 14, 2023, Plaintiffs submitted a FOIA request to DOD
component SOUTHCOM. FOIA Request No. SC 23-086-S (Sept. 14, 2023) (“Request” or
“Plaintiffs’ FOIA Request”) (Ex. 4). The Request sought “ . . . the records TO or FROM the
following custodians,” containing the terms:
1) Sound of Freedom;
2) Military Times;
3) Rubio;
4) Qanon; and
5) Q-Anon
(Ex. 4) at 1.
The Request sought the above-referenced records for the following custodians:
1) Gen. Laura J. Richardson;

2) Vice Adm. Alvin Holsey;
3) Amb. Jean E. Manes;
4) Maj. Gen. Scott A. Jackson;
5) Maj. Gen. Javier A. Reina;
6) CW5 Sandra M. Albelo;
7) Sgt. Maj. Rafael Rodriguez;
8) Col. Jeff E. Elliott;
9) Maj. Gene. Dustin A. Shultz;
10) Rear Adm. Thomas Allan;
11) Col. Douglas R. Burke;
12) Brig. Gen. Julie L. Nethercot;
13) Col. Craig C. Smith;
14) Kevin J. Bostick;
15) Dr. Adam Winkleman;
16) Elizabeth Gonzalez;
17) Col. Manny Ortiz; and
18) Capt. Elysia Ng-baumhackl.’
Id.
13. The Request was further limited as Plaintiffs requested only those documents from
September 6, 2023 through September 14, 2023, and excluded press clippings and mailers. Id. at
2.
5
14. The Request further sought a fee waiver. Id. at 4.
15. DOD has never substantively responded to the Request.
16. On September 17, 2023, Plaintiffs received an email stating that Defendant would
be unable to respond within the 20-day statutory frame. It noted unusual circumstances existed
and that Defendant was “ . . . unable to provide you with an estimated competition date as the
office/components who will conduct records searches have not yet had time to evaluate the time
needed to search and review records.” (Ex. 5). Plaintiffs construe this email to be an invocation
of the 10-day extension for “unusual circumstances”. See 8 C.F.R. Part 5 § 5.5(c).
17. Since the September 17, 2023 email, no documents have been produced in response
to the Request, nor has Defendant further contacted Plaintiffs.
18. Thirty business days from September 14, 2023, is October 27, 2023.
19. As of the date of this filing, Defendant has failed to produce any records, responsive
or other, in response to the Request, nor has it otherwise demonstrated that the requested records
are exempt from production. Additionally, Defendant has failed to meet thirty business day time
frame to provide a determination. See 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(A)–(B).
20. Pursuant to federal law, Plaintiffs are deemed to have exhausted their
administrative remedies as Defendant failed to make a determination within the applicable time
frame. See 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(C)(i).
6
CLAIMS
COUNT I
Violation of FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552

Failure to Conduct Searches for Responsive Records
21. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference all preceding paragraphs and incorporate each
paragraph of each count as applicable to each other count.
22. Plaintiffs properly requested records within the possession, custody, and control of
Defendant.
23. Defendant has failed to produce any responsive records.
24. Defendant is subject to FOIA and therefore must comply with 5 U.S.C § 552 and
make reasonable efforts to search for requested records. Plaintiffs have a legal right to obtain such
records, and no legal basis exists for Defendant’s failure to conduct reasonable searches for
records.
25. Plaintiffs have a statutory right to the information sought, are being irreparably
harmed by Defendant’s unlawful failure to comply with FOIA and failure to conduct searches for
responsive records and Plaintiffs will continue to be irreparably harmed unless Defendant is
compelled to comply with applicable federal statutes.
26. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B) authorizes the grant of injunctive relief to Plaintiffs as
Defendant continues to violate the FOIA provisions and improperly withhold responsive records.
27. 28 U.S.C. § 2201 authorizes declaratory relief because an action and justiciable
controversy exists regarding Defendant’s actions.
7
COUNT II

Wrongful Withholding of Non-Exempt Responsive Records
29. Plaintiffs properly requested records within the possession, custody, and control of
the Defendants.
30. Defendant is subject to FOIA and therefore must release any non-exempt records
and provide lawful reasons for withholding any materials deemed exempt.
31. Defendant is wrongfully withholding non-exempt records requested by Plaintiffs
by failing to produce any records response to Plaintiffs’ request.
32. No basis exists for Defendant’s failures to provide responses to Plaintiffs’ request.
Plaintiffs have constructively exhausted their administrative remedies under FOIA by virtue of
Defendant’s failure to reach a determination on the request and release responsive records.
33. Plaintiffs have a statutory right to the information sought, are being irreparably
harmed by Defendant’s unlawful failure to comply with FOIA and failure to conduct searches for
responsive records and Plaintiffs will continue to be irreparably harmed unless Defendant is
compelled to comply with applicable federal statutes.
COUNT III

Wrongful Denial of Fee Waiver
8
35. Plaintiffs properly requested records within the possession, custody, or control of
Defendant.
36. Defendant has constructively denied Plaintiffs’ application for a fee waiver
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(ii) & (iii) and 6 C.F.R. § 5.11(d)(2).
37. The Request does not have a commercial purpose because Heritage is a 501(c)(3)
nonprofit, Howell acts in his capacity as a Heritage employee, and release of the information
sought does not further Plaintiffs’ commercial interest.
38. Plaintiffs are members of the news media as they “gather[] information of potential
interest to a segment of the public, use[] . . . [their] editorial skills to turn the raw materials into a
distinct work and distribute[] that work to an audience” via Heritage’s major news outlet, The
Daily Signal. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(a)(ii).
39. Disclosure of the information sought by the Request also “is in the public interest
because it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities
of the government.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(iii).
40. Defendant has “failed to comply with a[]time limit under paragraph (6)” as to the
Request. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(viii)(I).
41. Plaintiffs have a statutory right to a fee waiver.
42. Defendant is in violation of FOIA by denying a fee waiver.
43. Plaintiffs are being irreparably harmed by reason of Defendant’s violation of FOIA.
Plaintiffs are being denied a fee waiver to which they are statutorily entitled and that is important
to carrying out Plaintiffs’ functions as a non-partisan research and educational institution and
publisher of news. Plaintiffs will continue to be irreparably harmed unless Defendant is compelled
to comply with the law.
9
44. Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law.
45. Plaintiffs have constructively exhausted their administrative remedies.
COUNT IV

Statutory Bar Against Charging Fees
47. Plaintiffs properly requested records within the possession, custody, or control of
Defendant.
48. The Request does not have a commercial purpose because Heritage is a 501(c)(3)
nonprofit, Howell acts in his capacity as a Heritage employee, and release of the information
sought does not further Plaintiffs’ commercial interest.
49. Plaintiffs are members of the news media as they “gather[] information of potential
interest to a segment of the public, use[] . . . [their] editorial skills to turn the raw materials into a
distinct work, and distribute[] that work to an audience” via Heritage’s major news outlet, The
Daily Signal. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(a)(ii).
50. Disclosure of the information sought by the Request also “is in the public interest
because it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities
of the government.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(iii).
51. Defendant has “failed to comply with a[]time limit under paragraph (6)” as to the
Request. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(viii)(I).
52. Defnedant is currently statutorily barred from charging fees related to Plaintiffs’
FOIA Request. Therefore, Plaintiffs have a statutory right to have their request processed without
being charged any fees.
10
53. Plaintiffs are being irreparably harmed by reason of Defendant’s violation of FOIA.
Plaintiffs will continue to be irreparably harmed unless Defendant is compelled to comply with
the law.
54. Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law.
55. Plaintiffs have constructively exhausted their administrative remedies.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
For these reasons, Plaintiffs asks this Court to:
a. Declare unlawful Defendant’s refusal to disclose requested records;
b. Declare that Defendant’s failure to make determinations to Plaintiffs’ FOIA
Request within the statutory time frame violates FOIA;
c. Order Defendant to conduct a search for any and all records responsive to
Plaintiffs’ FOIA Request and demonstrate that it employed search methods
reasonably likely to lead to the discovery of records responsive to Plaintiffs’
FOIA Request;
d. Order Defendant to produce, within twenty days of the Court’s order, or by such
other date as the Court deems appropriate, any and all non-exempt records
responsive to Plaintiffs’ FOIA Request as well as a Vaughn index of any
responsive records withheld under claim of exemption;
e. Enjoin Defendant from continuing to withhold any and all non-exempt records
responsive to Plaintiffs’ FOIA Request;
f. Award Plaintiffs the costs of this action and reasonable attorney’s fees; and
g. Grant such other and further relief as this Court deems equitable and just.
11
Dated: December 21, 2023 Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Samuel Everett Dewey

SAMUEL EVERETT DEWEY
(No. 999979)
Chambers of Samuel Everett Dewey, LLC
Telephone: (703) 261-4194
Email: [email protected]
JOSEPH B. EDLOW
Bar No.: MD0147
The Law Offices of Joseph Edlow LLC
1201 Seven Locks Road, Suite 360
Rockville, Maryland 20854
Telephone: 410-303-1450
Email: [email protected]
Counsel for Plaintiffs
12
Case 1:23-cv-03798 Document 1-1 Filed 12/21/23 Page 1 of 2
CIVIL COVER SHEET
JS-44 (Rev. 11/2020 DC)
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS
The Heritage Foundation & Mike Howell U.S. Department of Defense
11001
(b) COUNTY OF RESIDENCE OF FIRST LISTED PLAINTIFF _____________________ 11001
COUNTY OF RESIDENCE OF FIRST LISTED DEFENDANT _____________________
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED
(c) ATTORNEYS (FIRM NAME, ADDRESS, AND TELEPHONE NUMBER) ATTORNEYS (IF KNOWN)
Samuel Everett Dewey

(999979)
2200 12th Court North Apt. 609
Arlington VA 22201
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (PLACE AN x IN ONE BOX FOR
(PLACE AN x IN ONE BOX ONLY) PLAINTIFF AND ONE BOX FOR DEFENDANT) FOR DIVERSITY CASES ONLY!
o 1 U.S. Government o 3 Federal Question

PTF DFT
o1 o1
PTF
o4 o4
DFT
Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of this State Incorporated or Principal Place
of Business in This State
o 2 U.S. Government o 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State o2 o2 Incorporated and Principal Place o5 o5
Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of
of Business in Another State
Parties in item III) Citizen or Subject of a
Foreign Country
o3 o3 Foreign Nation o6 o6
IV. CASE ASSIGNMENT AND NATURE OF SUIT
(Place an X in one category, A-N, that best represents your Cause of Action and one in a corresponding Nature of Suit)
o A. Antitrust o B. Personal Injury/ o C. Administrative Agency o D. Temporary Restraining
Malpractice Review Order/Preliminary
410 Antitrust Injunction
310 Airplane 151 Medicare Act
315 Airplane Product Liability Any nature of suit from any category
320 Assault, Libel & Slander Social Security
may be selected for this category of
861 HIA (1395ff)
330 Federal Employers Liability case assignment.
862 Black Lung (923)
340 Marine
863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) *(If Antitrust, then A governs)*
345 Marine Product Liability
864 SSID Title XVI
350 Motor Vehicle
865 RSI (405(g))
355 Motor Vehicle Product Liability
Other Statutes
360 Other Personal Injury
891 Agricultural Acts
362 Medical Malpractice
893 Environmental Matters
365 Product Liability
890 Other Statutory Actions (If
367 Health Care/Pharmaceutical
Administrative Agency is
Personal Injury Product Liability
Involved)
368 Asbestos Product Liability
o E. General Civil (Other) OR o F. Pro Se General Civil

Real Property Bankruptcy Federal Tax Suits
210 Land Condemnation 422 Appeal 27 USC 158 870 Taxes (US plaintiff or 465 Other Immigration Actions
220 Foreclosure 423 Withdrawal 28 USC 157 defendant) 470 Racketeer Influenced
230 Rent, Lease & Ejectment 871 IRS-Third Party 26 USC & Corrupt Organization
240 Torts to Land Prisoner Petitions 7609
480 Consumer Credit
245 Tort Product Liability 535 Death Penalty
Forfeiture/Penalty 485 Telephone Consumer
290 All Other Real Property 540 Mandamus & Other
625 Drug Related Seizure of Protection Act (TCP$)
550 Civil Rights
Property 21 USC 881 490 Cable/Satellite TV
Personal Property 555 Prison Conditions
690 Other 850 Securities/Commodities/
370 Other Fraud 560 Civil Detainee – Conditions
Exchange
371 Truth in Lending of Confinement
Other Statutes 896 Arbitration
380 Other Personal Property
375 False Claims Act 899 Administrative Procedure
Damage Property Rights
376 Qui Tam (31 USC Act/Review or Appeal of
385 Property Damage 820 Copyrights
3729(a)) Agency Decision
Product Liability 830 Patent
400 State Reapportionment 950 Constitutionality of State
835 Patent – Abbreviated New
430 Banks & Banking Statutes
Drug Application
450 Commerce/ICC Rates/etc 890 Other Statutory Actions
840 Trademark
460 Deportation (if not administrative agency
880 Defend Trade Secrets Act of
462 Naturalization review or Privacy Act)
2016 (DTSA)
Application
o G. Habeas Corpus/ o H. Employment o I. FOIA/Privacy Act o J. Student Loan
2255 Discrimination
530 Habeas Corpus – General 442 Civil Rights – Employment 895 Freedom of Information Act 152 Recovery of Defaulted
510 Motion/Vacate Sentence (criteria: race, gender/sex, 890 Other Statutory Actions Student Loan
463 Habeas Corpus – Alien national origin, (if Privacy Act) (excluding veterans)
Detainee discrimination, disability, age,
religion, retaliation)
*(If pro se, select this deck)* *(If pro se, select this deck)*
o K. Labor/ERISA o L. Other Civil Rights o M. Contract o N. Three-Judge

(non-employment) (non-employment) Court
110 Insurance
710 Fair Labor Standards Act 441 Voting (if not Voting Rights 120 Marine 441 Civil Rights – Voting
720 Labor/Mgmt. Relations Act) 130 Miller Act (if Voting Rights Act)
740 Labor Railway Act 443 Housing/Accommodations 140 Negotiable Instrument
751 Family and Medical 440 Other Civil Rights 150 Recovery of Overpayment
Leave Act 445 Americans w/Disabilities – & Enforcement of
790 Other Labor Litigation Employment Judgment
791 Empl. Ret. Inc. Security Act 446 Americans w/Disabilities – 153 Recovery of Overpayment
Other of Veteran’s Benefits
448 Education 160 Stockholder’s Suits
190 Other Contracts
195 Contract Product Liability
196 Franchise
V. ORIGIN
o 1 Original o 2 Removed o 3 Remanded o 4 Reinstated o 5 Transferred o 6 Multi-district o 7 Appeal to o 8 Multi-district
Proceeding from State from Appellate or Reopened from another Litigation District Judge Litigation –
Court Court district (specify) from Mag. Direct File
Judge
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION (CITE THE U.S. CIVIL STATUTE UNDER WHICH YOU ARE FILING AND WRITE A BRIEF STATEMENT OF CAUSE.)
VII. REQUESTED IN CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS DEMAND $ Check YES only if demanded in complaint
COMPLAINT ACTION UNDER F.R.C.P. 23 JURY DEMAND: YES NO
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)

IF ANY
(See instruction)
YES NO ✘ If yes, please complete related case form
December 20, 2023

DATE: _________________________ /s/ Samuel Everett Dewey
SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD _________________________________________________________
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET JS-44

Authority for Civil Cover Sheet
The JS-44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and services of pleadings or other papers as required
by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the
Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of Court for each civil complaint filed.
Listed below are tips for completing the civil cover sheet. These tips coincide with the Roman Numerals on the cover sheet.
I. COUNTY OF RESIDENCE OF FIRST LISTED PLAINTIFF/DEFENDANT (b) County of residence: Use 11001 to indicate plaintiff if resident
of Washington, DC, 88888 if plaintiff is resident of United States but not Washington, DC, and 99999 if plaintiff is outside the United States.
III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES: This section is completed only if diversity of citizenship was selected as the Basis of Jurisdiction
under Section II.
IV. CASE ASSIGNMENT AND NATURE OF SUIT: The assignment of a judge to your case will depend on the category you select that best
represents the primary cause of action found in your complaint. You may select only one category. You must also select one corresponding
nature of suit found under the category of the case.
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION: Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing and write a brief statement of the primary cause.
VIII. RELATED CASE(S), IF ANY: If you indicated that there is a related case, you must complete a related case form, which may be obtained from
the Clerk’s Office.
Because of the need for accurate and complete information, you should ensure the accuracy of the information provided prior to signing the form.
FOIA Summons
1/13
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CLEAR FORM

Heritage Foundation & Mike Howell

)
Plaintiff )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 23-cv-3798
U.S. Department of Defense )
)
Defendant )
SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION
To: (Defendant’s name and address)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
1400 Defense Pentagon
Washington, D.C. 20301
A lawsuit has been filed against you.
Within 30 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) you must
serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney, whose name and
address are:
2200 12th Court North No. 609
Arlington, VA 22201
If you fail to respond, judgment by default may be entered against you for the relief demanded in the
complaint. You also must file your answer or motion with the court.
ANGELA D. CAESAR, CLERK OF COURT
Date:
Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk
FOIA Summons (1/13) (Page 2)
Civil Action No. 23-cv-3798
PROOF OF SERVICE
(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))
This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .
’ I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or
’ I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)
, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,
on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or
’ I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)
on (date) ; or
’ I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or
’ Other (specify):
.
My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ 0.00 .
I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.
Date:
Server’s signature
Printed name and title
Server’s address
Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:
Print Save As... Reset

FOIA Summons
1/13


)
Plaintiff )
)
)
Defendant )

Hon. Merrick Garland
Attorney General of the United States
950 Pennsylvannia Ave., N.W.
address are:
Arlington, VA 22201
Date:
PROOF OF SERVICE


on (date) ; or

on (date) ; or
.
Date:
Server’s address

FOIA Summons
1/13


)
Plaintiff )
)
)
Defendant )

Civil Process Clerk
U.S. Attorney's Office for D.C.
601 D Street, N.W.
address are:
Arlington, VA 22201
Date:
PROOF OF SERVICE


on (date) ; or

on (date) ; or
.
Date:
Server’s address

EXHIBIT 1
12/12/23, 3:29 PM Case 1:23-cv-03798
Rubio pressesDocument 1-5 canceled
military to reschedule Filed showings
12/21/23 Page
of ‘Sound 2 of 4| The Hill
of Freedom’
TRENDING: 2024 ELECTIONS SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE THE HILL ON NEWSNATION SPONSORED: CON
DEFENSE
Rubio presses military to reschedule canceled showings of

‘Sound of Freedom’
BY ELLEN MITCHELL - 09/13/23 3:33 PM ET
Share Tweet ... More
Advertisement. Your video will resume in 16 seconds.
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) is pressing U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) to

reschedule “without delay” two canceled showings of the Christian thriller “Sound of
Freedom,” according to a new letter obtained by The Hill.
In the letter, sent Wednesday to SOUTHCOM Commander Gen. Laura Richardson, Rubio
writes that he was “alarmed” to learn of the decision to cancel the film’s screenings at the
command’s headquarters in Doral, Fla.
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4202812-rubio-presses-military-to-rescheduled-canceled-showings-of-sound-of-freedom/ 1/11
12/12/23, 3:29 PM Case 1:23-cv-03798
12/21/23 Page
of Freedom’
SOUTHCOM originally intended to screen “Sound of Freedom” — a surprise box office hit
about a former federal agent rescuing children from sex trafficking — on Aug. 28 and Oct. 19
and invited all locally based military personnel to attend.
But the command scrapped the showings last month, citing concerns over copyright
infringement.
The film, which has grossed more than $185 million since its July 4 release, has also been the
subject of much scrutiny after its lead actor, Jim Caviezel, publicly linked the movie’s anti-
exploitation plotline to baseless QAnon theories.
Rubio contends that the impediments that prevented SOUTHCOM from screening the movie,
in particular the fear of copyright infringement, are no longer of issue as “the producers and
distributors of ‘Sound of Freedom’ have consented” to such a showing.
He also said he has learned that Angel Studios, which released the film, offered to send a
representative to meet with command personnel and their families after the screenings to
answer any questions.
“Since the concern which led to the cancellation has now been addressed, I urge you to
rectify this situation and ensure that the screenings of the film be rescheduled without delay,”
Rubio writes.
SOUTHCOM did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The “Sound of Freedom” is based on the work of Timothy Ballard, a controversial anti-
trafficking activist who started the anti-child exploitation group known as Operation
Underground Railroad.
Multiple outlets have reported that the group’s missions are difficult to verify and not fully
honest in what they’ve achieved.
U.S. Army Garrison-Miami initially chose to hold the screenings “after concluding it could help
raise awareness of human rights issues closely associated with the nefarious activities of
transnational criminal organizations (TCO) operating in Central America, South America and
the Caribbean, where SOUTHCOM closely partners with Host Nations to counter the threat
posed by those violent criminal groups to our hemisphere and its citizens,” according to Army
Col. Emanuel Ortiz.
SOUTHCOM later canceled the events after a review of “applicable laws and regulations
governing the use of materials subject to copyright and intellectual property laws for official
or recreational purposes,” noting that the film was widely available to see elsewhere.
Rubio presses that a screening is valuable to the command and hints at a double standard,
given that the Defense Department (DOD) regularly works with film studios to host viewings of
movies on U.S. military installations.
12/12/23, 3:29 PM Case 1:23-cv-03798
12/21/23 Page
of Freedom’
“As an example, the Army and Air Force Exchange Service offered advanced screenings of
‘Elvis’ at more than 20 U.S. Air Force and Army bases last year. This is not a novel concept —
and one in which DOD has a long history of supporting such events for service members and
their families,” Rubio writes.
TAGS LAURA RICHARDSON MARCO RUBIO MARCO RUBIO SOUND OF FREEDOM US

SOUTHERN COMMAND
Copyright 2023 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
SHARE TWEET ... MORE
SPONSORED CONTENT
Privacy Policy
How To Cope With Heavy News Cycles

21 Ninety | Sponsored
Top 10 Most Expensive Cat Breeds

The-Best-Info | Sponsored
A Smoothie For Everyday Of The Week

5 Super Foods That May Help Prevent Cancer

Healthy Lifestyle Mag. | Sponsored
5 Braided Hairstyles for You Holiday Party

Rep. Raskin says his son Thomas has died at 25
‘SNL’ mocks university presidents’ antisemitism hearing in cold open
JFK grandson goes viral for anti-restaurant rant
Reports of Putin’s death might not be greatly exaggerated
EXHIBIT 2
12/12/23, 3:32 PM Case 1:23-cv-03798 Document
Military base 1-6'Sound
abruptly cancels Filed 12/21/23
of Freedom' Page
screening, 2 producer
baffling of 5
Print Close
Military base abruptly cancels 'Sound of Freedom' screening,

baffling producer
By Michael Lee
Published September 18, 2023
Fox News
The producer of the blockbuster film "Sound of Freedom" expressed disappointment after planned screenings of the hit movie at a
U.S. military installation were canceled for mysterious reasons.
Eduardo Verástegui, the producer of "Sound of Freedom," and others behind the hit film have been trying for weeks to reschedule a
screening of the movie for troops at U.S. Southern Command, which was supposed to host two showings of the thriller that has
grossed over $200 million. However, those screenings were suddenly canceled under what he believed were confusing
circumstances.
"I made ‘Sound of Freedom’ to raise awareness of the rampant sex trafficking in children happening throughout Latin America and
into the United States with the goal of ending this modern-day slave trade," Verástegui told Fox News Digital. "Because
SOUTHCOM’s brave soldiers work to break up the transnational criminal organizations responsible for drug and sex-trafficking into
the U.S., we wanted to inspire and thank them for their service by offering a private screening on base."
The screenings were originally planned for Aug. 28 and Oct. 19 but were canceled shortly before the first scheduled event. In a
Military Times story published shortly after the first canceled event, base leadership explained that the screenings were canceled in
order to "prevent the appearance of copyright infringement."
EX-DHS AGENT WHO INSPIRED 'SOUND OF FREEDOM’ 'SERIOUSLY CONSIDERING' RUN FOR ROMNEY’S SENATE SEAT
Eduardo Verastegui poses during the red carpet for the movie "Sound of Freedom" at Cinemex Antara Polanco on Aug. 29, 2023 in
Mexico City. (Photo by Alan Espinosa/Getty Images)
However, the filmmakers argued no such concerns over copyright existed, with Verástegui telling Fox News Digital they "made it
100% clear that there are no copyright concerns with SOUTHCOM hosting the movie while it was in theaters."
Email exchanges between the filmmakers and a spokesperson for U.S. Southern Command that were shared with Fox News Digital
appear to show an attempt to clear up the confusion, with a representative for the filmmakers telling the SOUTHCOM official that
they "fully support our men and women in uniform" and there be "no circumstances" in which "copyright or intellectual property
infringement claims" would be made against the command.
The filmmakers even went so far as to offer to send a representative of the film down to meet with troops for the screening but were
again rebuked by installation leadership, this time for an entirely different reason.
"Because the film is already accessible in local theaters, we are respectfully declining the offer to screen it at our headquarters," a
SOUTHCOM spokesperson told the filmmaker in an email.
The filmmakers told Fox News Digital that no similar objections to the screenings had been raised before, compounding their
https://www.foxnews.com/us/military-base-abruptly-cancels-sound-of-freedom-screening-baffling-producer.print 1/4
of Freedom' Page
baffling of 5
confusion as they searched for an avenue to go ahead with the events as planned.
Alejandro Monteverde and Rod Barr attend the premiere of "Sound of Freedom" on June 28, 2023 in Vineyard, Utah. (Photo by
Fred Hayes/Getty Images for Angel Studios)
MAN WHO INSPIRED 'SOUND OF FREEDOM' HITS BACK AT CNN GUEST, LIBERAL REPORTERS OVER 'GROTESQUE'
CRITICISM
The canceled screenings caught the attention of Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., who penned a letter to leadership at SOUTHCOM last
week urging them to reschedule the screenings "without delay."
"Since the concern which led to the cancelation has now been addressed, I urge you to rectify this situation and ensure that the
screenings of the film be rescheduled without delay," Rubio wrote in the letter, which was shared with Fox News Digital.
According to a report on the controversy by the Hill, the U.S. Army Garrison-Miami had initially planned the screenings because
leadership believed the film "could help raise awareness of human rights issues closely associated with the nefarious activities of
transnational criminal organizations (TCO) operating in Central America, South America and the Caribbean, where SOUTHCOM
closely partners with Host Nations to counter the threat posed by those violent criminal groups to our hemisphere and its citizens."
However, later concerns about copyright infringement led to the events being canceled.
Senator Marco Rubio, a Republican from Florida. (Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Rubio also pointed out that the film's theme is "directly in line with SOUTHCOM’s mission to combat trafficking and transnational
criminal organizations in the command’s area of responsibility" and that the real-life events portrayed in the movie also occurred in
SOUTHCOM's Area of responsibility. Rubio further argued that U.S. military installations have previously hosted private screenings
of films, including over 20 private screenings of the film "Elvis" at Army and Air Force installations last year.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE US NEWS
"I was alarmed to learn of the decision to cancel the film’s screenings at SOUTHCOM. Especially given the fact that the U.S.
Department of Defense (DoD) regularly works with movie studios to host viewings of films on U.S. military installations for service
members and their families," Rubio wrote.
Verástegui told Fox News Digital his only goal is to see to it that the troops at SOUTHCOM are provided with the unique opportunity
to see the film, hoping such an event would help them be "re-energized in their efforts to combat child sex-trafficking in the
Americas."
"To our bewilderment, SOUTHCOM leadership has rejected our offer now for three different, shifting, and unconvincing reason,"
of Freedom' Page
baffling of 5
Verástegui said.
Jewel also called out the media or "politicizing" the film. In recent days, multiple outlets have tried to attach the "Sound of Freedom"
film to far-right conspiracy theories. (Angel Studios/ The Sound of Freedom)
CLICK TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Verástegui said he would even be "willing to get on a plane if needed tomorrow" and would bring "Tim Ballard, the real-life hero of
the movie, to deliver a copy of the film to the troops."
CLICK HERE FOR MORE US NEWS
"We are hopeful this matter will be resolved soon so that the troops can gather together and be touched like the tens of millions of
other Americans and people around the world who have seen this film and are saying with one voice that God’s children are not for
sale," Verástegui said.
Representatives for SOUTHCOM did not respond to multiple Fox News requests for comment.
Print Close
URL
https://www.foxnews.com/us/military-base-abruptly-cancels-sound-of-freedom-screening-baffling-producer
Home Video Politics U.S. Opinion Entertainment Tech Science Health Travel Lifestyle World Sports Weather
Privacy Terms
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. © FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15
minutes. Market data provided by Factset. Powered and implemented by FactSet Digital Solutions. Legal Statement. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by Refinitiv Lipper.Do Not Sell
my Personal Information - New Terms of Use - FAQ
of Freedom' Page
baffling of 5
EXHIBIT 3
September 13, 2023
General Laura Richardson

Commander
U.S. Southern Command
9301 NW 33rd Street
Doral, FL 33172
Dear General Richardson:
I write with regard to the cancellation of two planned showings of “Sound of Freedom”
at U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) headquarters in Doral, Florida. The film, which
centers around child sex trafficking in Latin America and the Caribbean, grossed more than
$185 million in theaters, making it one of the most successful, independent movies ever
produced.1 While reporting suggests that SOUTHCOM unexpectedly cancelled the movie due
to concerns about “copyright infringement,” I am aware that its producers and the studio have
communicated that this is not an impediment for the movie to be shown at SOUTHCOM to
service members and their families. As such, since the concern which led to the cancellation
has now been addressed, I urge you to rectify this situation and ensure that the screenings of the
film be rescheduled without delay.
The topic of the film is directly in line with SOUTHCOM’s mission to combat
trafficking and transnational criminal organizations in the command’s area of responsibility
(AOR), especially considering that the film’s real-life events occurred in the AOR.
SOUTHCOM identifies promoting respect for human rights in the AOR as one of its top
priorities, and all U.S. military personnel assigned to SOUTHCOM or deployed to the AOR,
are required to participate in human rights awareness education. Further, Combating
Trafficking in Persons training is required, and SOUTHCOM’s Human Rights Office focuses
on developing AOR-specific guidance for U.S. military personnel to identify indicators of
human trafficking.2
Given SOUTHCOM’s robust leadership on combatting trafficking in persons, and the

relevance of the “Sound of Freedom” movie to SOUTHCOM’s mission, I was alarmed to learn
of the decision to cancel the film’s screenings at SOUTHCOM. Especially given the fact that
the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) regularly works with movie studios to host viewings of
films on U.S. military installations for service members and their families. As an example, the
Army and Air Force Exchange Service offered advanced screenings of “Elvis” at more than 20
1
https://time.com/6304595/sound-of-freedom-controversy-success/
2
https://www.southcom.mil/Commanders-Priorities/Strengthen-Partnerships/Human-Rights/
U.S. Air Force and Army bases last year.3 This is not a novel concept – and one in which DoD
has a long history of supporting such events for service members and their families.
As the producers and distributors of “Sound of Freedom” have consented to screening

the movie at SOUTHCOM, there is no issue with copyright infringement claims. In fact, I
understand that Angel Studios offered to send a representative of the film to meet with
SOUTHCOM personnel and their families after the screenings to answer questions. Despite
this clarification it appears SOUTHCOM continues to block showing the movie because it is
“already accessible.” I hope you agree that what matters is whether the movie is worth showing
to the troops and potentially meeting the filmmakers, not whether the troops can buy a movie
ticket or stream the film on their own. As such, I request immediate confirmation that “Sound
of Freedom” will be shown at SOUTHCOM as originally planned.
I appreciate your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Marco Rubio
U.S. Senator
3
https://www.stripes.com/theaters/europe/2022-06-09/free-screening-of-elvis-at-military-bases-6284088.html
EXHIBIT 4
SENT VIA: [email protected]
September 14, 2023
U.S. Southern Command

Attn: SCSJA-FOIA
9301 NW 33rd St
Doral, FL 33172-1202
Dear FOIA Officer,
Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552, and the

implementing FOIA regulations of Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 286 of Title
32, I request the records TO or FROM the following custodians regarding the
following terms.
Custodians:
1. Gen. Laura J. Richardson
2. Vice Adm. Alvin Holsey
3. Amb. Jean E. Manes
4. Maj. Gen. Scott A. Jackson
5. Maj. Gen. Javier A. Reina
6. CW5 Sandra M. Albelo
7. Sgt. Maj. Rafael Rodriguez
8. Col. Jeff E. Elliott
9. Maj. Gen. Dustin A. Shultz
10. Rear Adm. Adm. Thomas Allan
11. Col. Douglas R. Burke
12. Brig. Gen. Julie L. Nethercot
13. Col. Craig C. Smith
14. Kevin J. Bostick
15. Dr. Adam Winkleman
16. Elizabeth Gonzalez
17. Col. Manny Ortiz
18. Capt. Elysia Ng-baumhackl
Terms:
1. Sound of Freedom
2. Military Times
3. Rubio
4. Qanon
5. Q-Anon
1
The time period for this request is from 09/06/23 to 09/14/2023.
To further narrow down the scope of the request, requester does not seek
correspondence that merely forwards press clippings, such as news accounts or
opinion pieces, newsletters, and published or docketed materials, if that
correspondence has no comment added by any party in the thread.
The terms “pertaining to,” “referring,” “relating,” or “concerning” with respect to

any given subject means anything that constitutes, contains, embodies, reflects,
identifies, states, refers to, deals with, or is in any manner whatsoever pertinent to that
subject.
The term “record” means any written, recorded, or graphic matter of any
nature whatsoever, regardless of how recorded, and whether original or copy,
including, but not limited to, the following: memoranda, reports, expense reports,
books, manuals, instructions, financial reports, working papers, records, notes,
letters, notices, confirmations, telegrams, receipts, appraisals, pamphlets, magazines,
newspapers, prospectuses, inter-office and intra-office communications, electronic
mail (emails), MMS or SMS text messages, instant messages, messaging systems
(such as iMessage, Microsoft Teams, WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal, Google Chat,
Twitter direct messages, Lync, Slack, and Facebook Messenger), contracts, cables,
telexes, notations of any type of conversation, telephone call, voicemail, meeting or
other communication, bulletins, printed matter, computer printouts, teletypes,
invoices, transcripts, diaries, analyses, returns, summaries, minutes, bills, accounts,
estimates, projections, comparisons, messages, correspondence, press releases,
circulars, financial statements, reviews, opinions, offers, studies and investigations,
questionnaires and surveys, and work sheets (and all drafts, preliminary versions,
alterations, modifications, revisions, changes, and amendments of any of the
foregoing, as well as any attachments or appendices thereto), and graphic or oral
records or representations of any kind (including without limitation, photographs,
charts, graphs, microfiche, microfilm, videotape, recordings and motion pictures), and
electronic, mechanical, and electronic records or representations of any kind
(including, without limitation, tapes, cassettes, disks, and recordings) and other
written, printed, typed, or other graphic or recorded matter of any kind or nature,
however produced or reproduced, and whether preserved in writing, film, tape, disk,
videotape or otherwise. A record bearing any notation not a part of the original text is
to be considered a separate record. A draft or non-identical copy is a separate record
within the meaning of this term. By definition a “communication” (as that term is
defined herein) is also a “record” if the means of communication is any written,
2
recorded, or graphic matter of any sort whatsoever, regardless of how recorded, and
whether original or copy.
The terms “and” and “or” should be construed broadly and either conjunctively
or disjunctively to bring within the scope of this request any information which
might otherwise be construed to be outside its scope. The terms “all,” “any,” and
“each” should each be construed as 'encompassing any and all. The singular includes
the plural number, and vice versa. The present tense includes the past and vice
versa. The masculine includes the feminine and neuter genders.
The term “communication” means each manner or means of disclosure or

exchange of information (in the form of facts, ideas, inquiries, or otherwise),
regardless of means utilized, whether oral, electronic, by document or otherwise, and
whether in an in-person meeting, by telephone, facsimile, e-mail (desktop or mobile
device), text message, MMS or SMS message, messaging systems (such as iMessage,
Microsoft Teams, WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal, Google Chat, Twitter direct messages,
Lync, Slack, and Facebook Messenger), regular mail, telexes, releases, or otherwise.
“Communications with,” “communications from,” and “communications

between” means any communication involving the related parties, regardless of
whether other persons were involved in the communication, and includes, but is not
limited to, communications where one party is cc’d or bcc’d, both parties are cc’d or
bcc’d, or some combination thereof.
Please consider all members of a document “family” to be responsive to the

request if any single “member” of that “family” is responsive, regardless of whether
the “family member” in question is “parent” or “child.”
In the interest of expediency and to minimize the research and/or duplication

burden on your staff, please send records electronically if possible. If this is not
possible, please notify me before sending to the mailing address listed below. If access
to this request will take longer than twenty business days, please let me know when I
might receive records or be able to inspect the requested records. Please produce
responsive documents as soon as they become available. In all cases, please
communicate with me at the below email address.
Please comply fully with 5 U.S.C. § 552(b). Accordingly, without limitation to

the foregoing, if any portion of this request is denied for any reason, please provide
written notice of the records or portions of records that are being withheld and cite
each specific exemption of the Freedom of Information Act on which the agency relies.
3
Moreover, to the extent that responsive records may be withheld in part produce all
reasonably segregable portions of those records. Additionally, please provide all
responsive documents even if they are redacted in full.
Fee Waiver Request
This request is primarily and fundamentally for non-commercial purposes. As

a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, Heritage Foundation does not have a commercial purpose and
the release of the information requested is not in Heritage Foundation’s commercial
interest. Heritage Foundation’s mission is to is to formulate and promote public
policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual
freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense. Heritage
Foundation uses the information requested and analyzes it in order to educate the
public through social media, 1 broadcast media 2 (traditional and nontraditional) and
press releases. 3 The requested information is in the public interest because canceling
the screening of the movie “Sound of Freedom” drew national attention and Congressional
scrutiny. 4
Thank you in advance for considering my request. If you have any

questions, or feel you need clarification of this request please contact me at
[email protected].
Sincerely,
Mike Howell
Director and Author at The Daily Signal
The Heritage Foundation
214 Massachusetts Ave, NE
1 Heritage Foundation on X. [@ Heritage] (Accessed: 2023, July 14). 674.8K Followers on X.
https://twitter.com/Heritage
2 Fox News. (Accessed: 2023, August, 14). Heritage Foundation launches Conservative Oversight
Project aimed at 'exposing' Biden admin, leftist policies. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/heritage-

conservative-oversight-project-biden-admin-leftist-policies
3 Heritage Foundation. (Accessed: 2023, August, 14). Press. https://www.heritage.org/press.
4
The Hill. Accessed: 2023, September, 14). Rubio presses military to reschedule canceled showings of ‘Sound of
Freedom’. https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4202812-rubio-presses-military-to-rescheduled-canceled-showings-of-
sound-of-freedom/
4
EXHIBIT 5
From: Villalobos, Marco T CIV SOUTHCOM SC-CC (USA)

To: OversightProject
Cc: Villalobos, Marco T CIV SOUTHCOM SC-CC (USA)
Subject: SC 23-086-S (Interim Response) (UNCLASSIFIED)
Date: Sunday, September 17, 2023 11:20:02 AM
CLASSIFICATION: UNCLASSIFIED
Dear Requester,
This is an interim response to your electronic Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request dated
Thursday, September 14, 2023, received in our office on the same day. As indicated in your quest,
you are seeking for:
Records TO or FROM a list of members of our Command. You also provided specific search
terms to be associated with all listed individuals.
We will be unable to respond to your request within the FOIA’s 20-day statutory time as there are
unusual circumstances which impact on our ability to quickly process your request. These unusual
circumstances are: (a) the need to search for and collect records from a facility geographically
separated from this Office; (b) the potential volume or records responsible to your request; and (c)
the need for consultation with one or more other agencies or DoD components having a substantial
interest in either the determination or the subject matter of the records.
At this time, we are unable to provide you with an estimated completion date as the
office/components who will conduct records searches have not yet had time to evaluate the time
needed to search and review records. We are also not able to estimate how much time will be
required for inter/intra agency review until the actual records have been located.
If you are not satisfied with our determination concerning the unusual circumstance, you may
contact the OSD/JS FOIA Public Liaison, Toni Fuentes, at 571-372-0462 or by email at
[email protected], or the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS) at the National
Archives and Records Administration. The contact Information for OGIS is as follows:
Office of Government Information Services

National Archives and Records Administration
8601 Adelphi Road-OGIS
College Park, MD 20740
E-mail: [email protected]
Telephone: 202-741-5770
Fax: 202-741-5769
Toll-free: 1-877-684-6448
You have the right to appeal to the appellate authority, Ms. Joo Chung, Assistant to the Secretary of
Defense for Privacy Civil Liberties, and Transparency (PCLT), Office of the Secretary of Defense, at
4800 Mark Center Drive, ATTN: PCLFD, FOIA Appeals, Mailbox #24, Alexandria, VA 22350-1700.
Your appeal must be postmarked within 90 calendar days of the date of this correspondence.
Alternatively, you may email your appeal to [email protected]. If you use email, please
include the word “FOIA Appeal” in the subject of the email. Please also reference FOIA case SC 23-
086-S in any appeal correspondence.
If you have any questions or concerns about the foregoing or about the processing of your request,
please do not hesitate to contact me at (305) 437-1108 and refer to the above listed case control
number.
Very Respectfully,
Mr. Marco T. Villalobos

Command FOIA Manager
United States Southern Command
9301 NW 33rd St | Doral, FL 33172
P: 305.437.1108 | DSN: 567.1108
FAX: 305.437.1320
NIPR: [email protected]
SIPR: [email protected]
JWICS: [email protected]
Office: [email protected]
CLASSIFICATION: UNCLASSIFIED

ECF No. 1 Complaint 23-Cv-3798

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

ECF No. 1 Complaint 23-Cv-3798

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ECF No. 1 Complaint 23-Cv-3798

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 1:23-cv-03798 Document 1 Filed 12/21/23 Page 1 of 12

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION )

5 U.S.C. § 552. In support thereof, Plaintiffs state the following:

1. In September 2023 DOD’s United States Southern Command (“SOUTHCOM”)

‘Sound of Freedom,’ The Hill, (Sept. 13, 2023, 3:33PM),

showings-of-sound-of-freedom/. (Ex. 1).

2. Citing regulations “governing the use of materials subject to copyright and

FoxNews (Sept. 18, 2023, 1:02pm), https://www.foxnews.com/us/military-base-abruptly-cancels-

sound-of-freedom-screening-baffling-producer. (Ex. 2). SOUTHCOM did not elaborate on the

of Freedom later consented to a rescheduled screening and offered to send a “representative” to

it is highly relevant to SOUTHCOM’s operational mission.

3. Senator Marco Rubio wrote to SOUTHCOM on September 13, 2023, urging

4. On information and belief SOUTHCOM has never screened Sound of Freedom.

5. Plaintiffs’ FOIA request sought transparency on SOUTHCOM leadership’s

of copyright law and intellectual property.

6. Plaintiff The Heritage Foundation is a Washington, D.C.-based nonpartisan public

Foundation, About Heritage, found at https://www.heritage.org/about-heritage/mission (last

The Daily Signal.

Project, found at https://www.heritage.org/oversight (last visited Dec. 18, 2023); X, found at

in the national debate.

national interests.” See U.S. Southern Command, About US, found at

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

10. Venue lies in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1391(e).

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

following custodians,” containing the terms:

1) Gen. Laura J. Richardson;

14. The Request further sought a fee waiver. Id. at 4.

15. DOD has never substantively responded to the Request.

to the Request, nor has Defendant further contacted Plaintiffs.

frame to provide a determination. See 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(A)–(B).

frame. See 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(C)(i).

Violation of FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552

paragraph of each count as applicable to each other count.

23. Defendant has failed to produce any responsive records.

compelled to comply with applicable federal statutes.

26. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B) authorizes the grant of injunctive relief to Plaintiffs as

controversy exists regarding Defendant’s actions.

Violation of FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552

paragraph of each count as applicable to each other count.

31. Defendant is wrongfully withholding non-exempt records requested by Plaintiffs

by failing to produce any records response to Plaintiffs’ request.

compelled to comply with applicable federal statutes.

Violation of FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552

paragraph of each count as applicable to each other count.

pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(ii) & (iii) and 6 C.F.R. § 5.11(d)(2).

sought does not further Plaintiffs’ commercial interest.

Daily Signal. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(a)(ii).

because it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities

of the government.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(iii).

Request. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(viii)(I).

41. Plaintiffs have a statutory right to a fee waiver.

42. Defendant is in violation of FOIA by denying a fee waiver.

to comply with the law.

44. Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law.

45. Plaintiffs have constructively exhausted their administrative remedies.

Violation of FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552

paragraph of each count as applicable to each other count.