Electronic Privacy Information Center v. Customs and Border Protection
248 F. Supp. 3d 12
| D.D.C. | 2017Background
- EPIC filed a FOIA request seeking documents about U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s Analytical Framework for Intelligence (AFI) system; CBP produced some records and withheld 269 pages in whole or in part under FOIA Exemption 7(E).
- The withheld materials fell into four categories: AFI screen shots, AFI training materials, statements of work/purchase orders, and AFI data-source documentation.
- The parties filed renewed cross-motions for summary judgment after the Court ordered a more detailed Vaughn index; CBP submitted a supplemental declaration and Vaughn index describing the withheld material and asserted risks of circumvention.
- EPIC argued (inter alia) that Exemption 7(E) does not apply because AFI is for crime prevention (not investigations) and that CBP failed to show reasonable risk of circumvention and failed segregability requirements.
- The Court reviewed the supplemental declarations and Vaughn index, found the materials were compiled for law enforcement purposes (undisputed), and evaluated whether disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention and whether nonexempt material was reasonably segregable.
- The Court granted CBP’s motion and denied EPIC’s, concluding Exemption 7(E) applied to the withheld categories and that CBP met its segregability obligations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Applicability of Exemption 7(E) (law-enforcement nexus) | AFI materials are crime-prevention, not investigations, so 7(E) is inapplicable | AFI records were compiled for law-enforcement purposes; threshold not disputed | Court: threshold law-enforcement purpose satisfied; statute not limited to criminal investigations, so 7(E) may apply |
| Whether disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law | CBP failed to show how release would reasonably risk circumvention; declarations are boilerplate | CBP showed logically how disclosure of system functions, access, and techniques could enable circumvention or hacking | Court: CBP met the relatively low Mayer Brown/Blackwell standard; risk of circumvention reasonably expected |
| Specific categories: screen shots & training materials; statements of work/purchase orders; data-source docs | EPIC: categorical descriptions insufficient and implausible to justify withholding | CBP: Vaughn index details how each category reveals access, navigation, search techniques, products, and identifiers that could enable evasion | Court: Each category described in Vaughn index could facilitate circumvention; withholding proper under 7(E) |
| Segregability of nonexempt portions | CBP’s declarations are conclusory; did not identify segregable portions | CBP provided detailed Vaughn index and explanations correlating withheld portions; asserted nonsegregability where intertwined | Court: Vaughn index plus declarations provided sufficiently detailed justification; CBP disclosed all reasonably segregable nonexempt material |
Key Cases Cited
- Blackwell v. FBI, 646 F.3d 37 (D.C. Cir.) (Exemption 7(E) requires logical showing risk of circumvention, not specific proof)
- Mayer Brown LLP v. Internal Revenue Serv., 562 F.3d 1190 (D.C. Cir.) (7(E) standard: reasonably expected risk of circumvention)
- Vaughn v. Rosen, 484 F.2d 820 (D.C. Cir.) (Vaughn index requirements for agency justifications)
- King v. Dep’t of Justice, 830 F.2d 210 (D.C. Cir.) (agency must provide relatively detailed justification correlating exemptions to withheld material)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (summary judgment standard when nonmoving party lacks sufficient proof)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (summary judgment: view evidence in light most favorable to nonmoving party)