Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton shed little new light on her use of a private email system as secretary of state in a carefully worded, court-ordered response to 25 detailed questions by a conservative legal group in a civil public records lawsuit in Washington Thursday.

Clinton, submitting written answers under oath through her attorney, David Kendall, cited objections in declining to address several questions in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit brought by Judicial Watch.

Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, at a fundraiser in San Francisco on Thursday, is being sued by Judicial Watch.

Kendall said inquiries about cybersecurity warnings, about the system’s vulnerability to hacking, as well as its creation before and management after Clinton’s time in office were beyond the scope of questions allowed by U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan of Washington.

In the 20-page filing, Kendall wrote that Clinton did “not recall” the answers to specific questions at least 20 times.

Subject to such objections, Kendall wrote, “Secretary Clinton states that she does not recall considering factors other than convenience in deciding to use a personal e-mail account to conduct official State Department business.”

Kendall continued, “She believed that her e-mails with persons with state.gov e-mail accounts were already captured in the State Department’s recordkeeping systems.

“Secretary Clinton does not recall anyone from the State Department asking her for access to her clintonemail.com e-mail account or asking her to print her work-related e-mails when she was preparing to leave office.”

In a statement, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said, “Our lawyers will be reviewing the responses closely. Mrs. Clinton’s refusal to answer many of the questions in a clear and straightforward manner further reflects disdain for the rule of law.”

He added in an interview, “Her absolute refusal to answer questions about why she used the system despite warnings about security is notable.”

Government lawyers for the State Department, in a separate court filing, echoed Kendall’s objections to 12 of the 25 questions.

Asked why Clinton continued using her account despite sending a June 28, 2011, message directing all State Department personnel to avoid using personal email accounts to conduct official business, citing targeting by “online adversaries,” Kendall objected that the question concerned cybersecurity issues, that Clinton’s name at the end of the cable was a formality that did not mean she authored or reviewed the cable, and that she did not recall seeing it.