COVID-19 Records

NIH Hid Public Comments Package — page 107

of 128 pages

← p.106 p.108 → · this page in the original PDF · package

/OD) [E] /OD) [E] Lankford, nate (NIH/OD) [E] limeni, Lydia /OD) [E] Lankford, nate (NIH/OD) [E] ie, Amanda This e-mail message is intended for the exclusive use of the recipient(s) named above. It may contain information that is protected, privileged, or confidential, and it should not be disseminated, distributed, or copied to persons not authorized to receive such information. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited. If you think you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender immediately. From: Fine, Amanda (NIH/OD) [E] < @nih.gov> Sent: Wednesday, December 8, 2021 8:57 PM To: Imhoff, Sarah (NIH/OD) [E] < @nih.gov>; Kern, Anna (NIH/OD) [E] < @nih.gov> Cc: Spruill, Crystal (NIH/OD) [C] < @nih.gov>; Prince, Scott (NIH/OD) [E] < @nih.gov>; Lankford, David (NIH/OD) [E] < @od31tm1.od.nih.gov>; Myles, Renate (NIH/OD) [E] < @mail.nih.gov>; Polimeni, Lydia (NIH/OD) [E] < @nih.gov> Subject: RE: PETA Lawsuit Update and Requests for Information Hi Sarah- So sorry for writing late. Crazy week for us! A call would be great, but we have another crazy day tomorrow and the best time that will work is 12:30-1pm. Will that work for you all as well? I'm attaching our responses to your comments in the stipulations document. I've included the answers to your questions below (highlighted). To answer your question about the key policy decision maker: that would be Renate. In terms of who has the most information to talk through the stipulation--that would be all of the OCPL people on this email. We each have different pieces of the information. My take away from the below explanation is that if we want to continue to moderate off topic comments on Facebook and Instagram, then we must decide to fight the lawsuit, and only if we win, then we could continue to do so. Is that accurate? Looking forward to the call. Thanks, Amanda From: Imhoff, Sarah (NIH/OD) [E] < @nih.gov> Sent: Wednesday, December 8, 2021 6:32 PM To: Kern, Anna (NIH/OD) [E] < @nih.gov> Cc: Spruill, Crystal (NIH/OD) [C] < @nih.gov>; Prince, Scott (NIH/OD) [E] < @nih.gov>; Lankford, David (NIH/OD) [E] < @od31tm1.od.nih.gov>; Myles, Renate (NIH/OD) [E] < @mail.nih.gov>; Fine, Amanda (NIH/OD) [E] < @nih.gov>; Polimeni, Lydia (NIH/OD) [E] < @nih.gov> Subject: RE: PETA Lawsuit Update and Requests for Information Hi, I want to clarify my answer below to #1. I just heard from DOJ that they'd prefer holding on adding any new keywords to the filter list for right now. It would be easier to just litigate with the universe we have, rather than change the facts at a later stage. However, our fact stipulation will expressly reserve the right for NIH to add content neutral keyword filters to capture posts that violate the comment guidelines in the future. Please let me know if you have any further questions about this point. Thank you, Sarah J. Imhoff, JD, MHSA Senior Attorney Office of the General Counsel

This is our OCR of the page, with running headers and footers removed. The Committee's PDF is authoritative; quote from it. Machine-readable, including the uncleaned text: /api/page/nih_public_comments/107

Records on this page

RecordDateTypePages
RE: PETA Lawsuit Update and Requests for Information 2021-12-08 email 107–108
RE: PETA Lawsuit Update and Requests for Information 2021-12-08 email 107
RE: PETA Lawsuit Update and Requests for Information 2021-12-08 email 106–107