---
title: "The Department of Justice (September 21, 2026) filed a motion for summary judgment in federal court, which if granted by the judge would end David Grusch's federal FOIA lawsuit against the Department of Defense"
url: "https://usubjects.com/article/the-department-of-justice-september-21-2026-filed-a-motion-for-summary-judgment-in-federal-court-whi-3778"
updated: "2026-09-26T16:13:50.216Z"
description: "The Department of Justice filed a motion for summary judgment on September 21, 2026, asking a federal court to end David Grusch’s FOIA lawsuit against the Department of Defense. The DOJ/DoD memorandum states that the adequacy of the DoD’s search is the only remaining issue; Grusch’s attorneys have until October 12, 2026, to file an opposition."
sources: ["https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72351349/grusch-v-united-states-department-of-defense/?order_by=desc"]
licence: "All rights reserved"
---

# The Department of Justice (September 21, 2026) filed a motion for summary judgment in federal court, which if granted by the judge would end David Grusch's federal FOIA lawsuit against the Department of Defense

Published: 2026-09-25  
Source: [r/UFOs](https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72351349/grusch-v-united-states-department-of-defense/?order_by=desc)

### Overview

The U.S. Department of Justice, representing the Department of Defense, filed a **motion for summary judgment on September 21, 2026**, asking a federal court to rule in its favor and end David Grusch’s Freedom of Information Act lawsuit without a trial. The filing was entered in *Grusch v. United States Department of Defense*, case number **1:26-cv-00607**, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.

A grant of summary judgment would resolve the case based on the existing record rather than send it to trial. The motion does not itself end the lawsuit; **District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema must first decide whether the government has met the legal standard for judgment as a matter of law**. Grusch’s attorneys have until October 12, 2026, to file an opposition.

### The Government’s Position

The Defense Department’s memorandum supporting the motion identifies the adequacy of the agency’s search as the **only remaining issue** in the case, according to the filing summary. In FOIA litigation, that question generally concerns whether an agency made a search reasonably calculated to locate responsive records. The dispute is therefore focused on the government’s search process, rather than on whether the requested materials should ultimately be released under one or more FOIA exemptions.

The docket shows that the Defense Department filed the motion as entry 30, followed by a supporting memorandum and accompanying materials. The government submitted **Exhibit DEX 1** and an errata document, indicating that the court has been provided with evidentiary materials supporting the agency’s position. The filings were submitted by Matthew Mezger on behalf of the Defense Department.

### Case Schedule and Procedural History

The case has undergone several procedural delays and status reviews during 2026. On April 7, Judge Brinkema granted the parties’ joint request to stay proceedings for 90 days and directed them to submit periodic status reports. The stay was later extended for an additional 30 days beginning July 6. The parties filed joint status reports in May, June, July and August.

On August 6, the court established a briefing schedule for **cross-motions for summary judgment**, setting the case on a path toward resolution through written legal arguments. A final pretrial conference scheduled for August 21 was subsequently canceled. The September 21 filing represents the government’s first identified summary-judgment motion on the current docket.

### What Happens Next

A hearing on the Defense Department’s motion is scheduled for **November 20, 2026, at 10 a.m.** in Courtroom 700 of the federal courthouse in Alexandria, Virginia. Judge Brinkema will consider the government’s arguments, any opposition filed by Grusch’s legal team, and any reply or related submissions permitted under the court’s briefing schedule.

The judge could grant the motion, deny it, or determine that additional proceedings are necessary. If the court finds the search legally adequate, the lawsuit could end in the government’s favor. If it finds the search insufficient, the case could continue, potentially requiring additional searches or further litigation over the agency’s response.

### Broader Significance

The lawsuit is being closely followed because Grusch has become a prominent figure in public debate over alleged government-held information concerning unidentified anomalous phenomena. However, the docket entry itself does not establish the nature of any records at issue or indicate that the court has reached conclusions about claims involving UAPs.

**At this stage, no final decision has been issued.** The next major development will be Grusch’s October 12 response, followed by the scheduled November hearing and Judge Brinkema’s eventual ruling.

## Provenance

This USUBJECTS page is a summary or digest of the linked original source. Any accompanying generated visual is an illustrative reconstruction, not evidence.