Davidson v. United States State Department
264 F. Supp. 3d 97
| D.D.C. | 2017Background
- Plaintiff Lawrence U. Davidson III (pro se), owner of Export Strategic Alliance, sought State Department assistance and communications relating to an unpaid invoice and later submitted FOIA requests for records about how the Department handled his inquiries (requests cover records from June 30, 2009 onward).
- Prior proceedings: Court dismissed non-FOIA claims; earlier summary-judgment motion was granted in part and denied in part because the Department’s initial Vaughn index failed to justify numerous withholdings and the adequacy of certain searches was in doubt.
- The Department located 159 responsive documents: 34 released in full, 103 released in part, 22 withheld in full; it supplemented its declarations and submitted an updated Vaughn index addressing previously unexplained withholdings.
- Department invoked Privacy Act Exemption (d)(5) and FOIA Exemptions 5 (deliberative process / attorney privileges) and 6 (personal privacy) for withheld material; plaintiff challenged adequacy of the search, sufficiency of Vaughn index, and Exemption 6 redactions.
- Court required the Department to explain searches for records involving Ambassador Gene Cretz, embassy staff in Libya, an FBI agent inquiry, and passport records; the Department provided reasonably detailed affidavits describing targeted searches of relevant systems and offices.
- Court concluded the supplemental search and Vaughn index were adequate, and that withholdings under Privacy Act (d)(5), FOIA Exemption 5, and Exemption 6 were justified; summary judgment granted for the Department.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adequacy of search | Searches limited to plaintiff’s name and specific parameters were inadequate; agency should have searched for aliases/other terms | Conducted good-faith, reasonably detailed searches of record systems likely to contain responsive records per Court guidance | Search was adequate; limited, targeted keyword searches were proper and consistent with request scope |
| Sufficiency of Vaughn index | Vaughn index lacked specificity and did not follow Vaughn guidelines | Supplemental Vaughn index plus original adequately describe withheld records and identify exemptions | Vaughn indices collectively were adequate for adversarial testing; supplemental index cured prior deficiencies |
| Withholdings under Privacy Act Exemption (d)(5) | (no substantive objection) | Documents were compiled in reasonable anticipation of litigation or prepared for potential judicial/administrative proceedings | Withholdings under Exemption (d)(5) are proper; summary judgment for Defendant |
| FOIA Exemptions 5 & 6 (deliberative process, attorney privileges, and personal privacy) | Challenges Exemption 6 redactions as improper; alleges bad faith | Exemption 5 protects predecisional, deliberative communications and attorney work product/client communications; Exemption 6 protects employee names/contact info where privacy outweighs public interest | Exemption 5 withholdings (deliberative process, attorney–client, work product) upheld; Exemption 6 redactions justified because disclosure would not shed light on agency conduct and would invade privacy |
Key Cases Cited
- Morley v. CIA, 508 F.3d 1108 (D.C. Cir.) (standard for adequacy of FOIA search)
- Weisberg v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 627 F.2d 365 (D.C. Cir.) (agency must account for responsive records produced or withheld)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (Sup. Ct.) (summary-judgment standard)
- Vaughn v. Rosen, 484 F.2d 820 (D.C. Cir.) (Vaughn index purpose and requirements)
- U.S. Dep’t of State v. Wash. Post Co., 456 U.S. 595 (Sup. Ct.) (scope of FOIA Exemption 6 for "similar files")
- Multi Ag Media LLC v. Dep’t of Agric., 515 F.3d 1224 (D.C. Cir.) (balancing public interest against privacy under Exemption 6)
- Tax Analysts v. IRS, 117 F.3d 607 (D.C. Cir.) (what constitutes a reasonably described FOIA request)