A United States federal court has rejected an attempt to obtain discovery from President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and DCI Group in an ongoing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit involving the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
The United States District Court for the District of Columbia, in a ruling delivered on Friday, October 30, 2026, denied a motion filed by Aaron Greenspan seeking limited discovery from Tinubu and DCI Group over alleged cyberattacks on his website.
The development was disclosed in a statement posted on X by Bayo Onanuga, the Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy.
According to the statement, the court ruled that the proposed discovery was not sufficiently relevant to the substantive issues in the FOIA case involving the two American law enforcement agencies.
The decision effectively prevented Greenspan from introducing the alleged cyberattacks into the proceedings, keeping the case focused on issues directly related to the underlying dispute over access to government records.
Onanuga also disclosed that the court rejected Greenspan’s motion for summary judgment and other applications connected to the litigation.
The court equally denied a separate application by Karl Von Batten, who is not a party to the case, seeking permission to submit an amicus curiae, or friend-of-the-court, brief.
Greenspan’s related request for judicial notice was also rejected.
Reacting to the ruling, attorney Christopher W. Carmichael said the decision reaffirmed the legal boundaries governing FOIA proceedings.
Carmichael said the court had made it clear that a Freedom of Information Act case could not be used to pursue discovery unrelated to the legal questions before it. He added that rejecting the request against Tinubu and DCI Group reinforced the need to keep the litigation focused on the issues properly before the court.
Another attorney, Oluwole Afolabi, said the decisions had established procedural limits on the scope of the case.
Afolabi noted that the court had also rejected Greenspan’s motion for summary judgment and the separate request to introduce an amicus brief. He added that although the underlying FOIA issues remained before the court, the rulings clarified which matters could appropriately be considered in the proceedings.