Bloeser v. United States Department of Justice
811 F. Supp. 2d 316
D.D.C.2011Background
- Bloeser, proceeding pro se, sued DOJ under FOIA and the Privacy Act seeking all records under his name or SSN between January 1998 and January 24, 2009.
- DOJ moved for summary judgment arguing its searches were adequate and produced no responsive records.
- OIP conducted searches of two DOJ databases covering 1982–2000 and 2001–present, first on January 28–29, 2009, and again on February 11 and 18, 2009.
- DOJ advised the plaintiff that the searches did not locate records identifiable to him; OIG later searched and located five pages related to a May 2008 complaint, releasing those on March 6, 2009.
- Plaintiff appealed administratively, but the Director of OIP denied the appeal on July 13, 2009, finding the search adequate; plaintiff then filed this action.
- The court grants summary judgment for DOJ, holding the searches were reasonable and adequately documented.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DOJ's search was adequate under FOIA. | BloeSer argues records exist or were destroyed; searches were inadequate. | DOJ contends multiple database searches were reasonable and sufficient. | Yes; searches were adequate. |
| Whether speculative claims alone show bad faith or invalidate the search. | Speculates records exist or were relocated/destroyed; cites notations on received mail. | Speculation cannot rebut good-faith search; no evidence of bad faith. | No; speculation insufficient to show bad faith. |
| Whether plaintiff sufficiently narrowed the FOIA request to permit an adequate search. | Requests all records concerning him; broad scope implied failure to search. | FOIA requires reasonably described requests; broader requests are not required or feasible. | The request was not sufficiently narrowed to require broader search beyond what DOJ undertook. |
Key Cases Cited
- NLRB v. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co., 437 U.S. 214 (1983) (FOIA aims to inform; ensure an informed citizenry)
- Valencia-Lucena v. U.S. Coast Guard, 180 F.3d 321 (D.C. Cir. 1999) (agency search must be reasonably calculated to uncover relevant documents)
- Truitt v. Dep't of State, 897 F.2d 540 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (scope and method of search; standard for adequacy)
- Oglesby v. U.S. Dep't of Army, 920 F.2d 57 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (agency affidavits; presumption of good faith in searches)
- Weisberg v. Dep't of Justice, 745 F.2d 1476 (D.C. Cir. 1984) (adequacy of searches judged by reasonableness, not exhaustiveness)
- Weisberg v. Dep't of Justice, 627 F.2d 365 (D.C. Cir. 1980) (procedural standards for FOIA investigations)
- Iturralde v. Comptroller of the Currency, 315 F.3d 311 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (failure to uncover a single document does not render search inadequate)
- Wilbur v. CIA, 355 F.3d 675 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (mere speculation about uncovered documents does not imply bad faith)
- Assassination Archives & Research Ctr., Inc. v. CIA, 720 F. Supp. 217 (D.D.C. 1989) (FOIA requests must be sufficiently particular to enable search)
- Yeager v. DEA, 678 F.2d 315 (D.C. Cir. 1982) (requester entitled to records actually created and retained)