Ahuruonye v. United States Department of the Interior
239 F. Supp. 3d 136
| D.D.C. | 2017Background
- Plaintiff Barry Ahuruonye (pro se) filed suit under FOIA and the Privacy Act seeking: his SF-52 termination, SF-2809 health-benefits form, and his FY2014 Within-Grade Increase (WGI) Notice.
- Defendant (Dept. of the Interior / Fish and Wildlife Service) produced electronic screenshots of SF-52/SF-2809/SF-2810 and provided a memorandum that it identified as the 2014 WGI denial; it explained no system-generated 2014 WGI form existed due to a prior denial.
- Plaintiff disputed that the memorandum satisfied his FOIA request for a system-generated 2014 WGI form and alleged agency withholding and Privacy Act record-keeping violations, asserting possible willful destruction or concealment.
- Agency submitted a declaration from its Acting FOIA Officer describing the search (by name and SSN, no date limits), production of responsive records, and that the requested system form did not exist.
- District Court treated the facts as undisputed, found the agency’s search reasonable and in good faith, found no evidence rebutting the agency’s showing, and concluded no separate 2014 system-generated WGI record existed.
- Court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment, denied plaintiff’s cross-motion and motions to compel, and dismissed the Privacy Act claim for failure to show intentional or willful maintenance failure.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether agency unlawfully withheld a 2014 WGI form under FOIA | Ahuruonye contends the memo is not the requested system-generated 2014 WGI Notice and a distinct form exists that was withheld | Agency says it conducted a reasonable search, produced all responsive records, and no system-generated 2014 form exists due to prior denial | Court held agency conducted a reasonable search, provided all responsive records; no separate 2014 form existed, grant D’s summary judgment |
| Whether agency failed to produce SF-2809 or SF-52 in requested format | Plaintiff asserted he did not receive the SF-2809 and wanted hard-copy SF-52 | Agency produced screenshots and explained no hard-copy SF-52 exists because process is electronic; SF-2809/2810 were provided | Court treated SF-2809/format issues as addressed by agency; plaintiff conceded/failed to pursue claim, so claim resolved for defendant |
| Whether plaintiff rebutted agency’s presumption of good faith in FOIA search | Plaintiff relied on MSPB discovery responses and speculation to show agency possessed additional records | Agency’s declaration detailed search methods and results; plaintiff offered no specific contrary facts | Court held plaintiff failed to rebut agency declarations with specific facts; speculative allegations insufficient |
| Whether agency violated the Privacy Act by failing to maintain accurate records and acted willfully | Plaintiff alleged supervisor willfully altered/destroyed records and that inaccurate records caused adverse WGI decision | Agency showed no system form existed and that denial was communicated via memo; no evidence of willful conduct | Court held plaintiff failed to prove intentional/willful maintenance failure; Privacy Act claim dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., 530 U.S. 133 (standard for evaluating summary judgment) (general summary judgment standard)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (summary judgment and evidence viewed in light most favorable to nonmoving party)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (moving party entitled to summary judgment where nonmoving party fails to show essential element)
- Weisberg v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 705 F.2d 1344 (D.C. Cir.) (adequacy of FOIA search measured by reasonableness)
- Ancient Coin Collectors Guild v. U.S. Dep’t of State, 641 F.3d 504 (D.C. Cir.) (agency must show search was reasonably calculated to uncover responsive documents)
- SafeCard Servs. v. SEC, 926 F.2d 1197 (D.C. Cir.) (requester cannot rebut agency affidavits with mere speculation)