GANNETT SATELLITE INFORMATION NETWORK, LLC v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
1:17-cv-01175
D.D.C.Feb 23, 2018Background
- Five consolidated FOIA suits sought James Comey memos about conversations with President Trump and related records; USA Today and Freedom Watch sought additional Comey-related documents concerning other public figures.
- After in camera review and an ex parte proffer, the Court previously held the Comey memos exempt from disclosure under FOIA Exemption 7(A) because release could interfere with the Special Counsel’s investigation.
- The Government moved for summary judgment on remaining requests for (1) records relating to the Comey memos (USA Today) and (2) any Comey memoranda or related documents about Obama, the Clintons, Flynn, and Trump (Freedom Watch).
- The FBI searched Comey’s hard-copy files and emails (July 1, 2015–May 9, 2017) using targeted search terms and located three responsive pages (a one-page email and a two-page email chain).
- The FBI withheld those three pages under Exemption 7(A); the Court conducted in camera review and considered segregability, concluding some non-exempt material could be produced.
- Court granted the Government’s motion largely, ordering production of a redacted version of one email chain while affirming that withholding the exempt portions was proper.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adequacy of search | FBI searches were insufficiently targeted; Plaintiffs challenge thoroughness (USA Today limited). | FBI used inventories and search software with reasonable terms; searched likely locations. | Search was adequate; FBI demonstrated searches reasonably calculated to uncover responsive records. |
| Withholding under Exemption 7 threshold (compiled for law enforcement) | Records not shown to be compiled for law enforcement (implied challenge by non-response). | Records relate to Special Counsel’s law-enforcement investigation. | Threshold met; records compiled for law-enforcement purposes. |
| Withholding under Exemption 7(A) (interference with enforcement) | Government’s public declarations are too conclusory to show release would interfere. | Disclosure could reveal non-public details about memos, highlighting activities/individuals and hampering investigation. | Exemption 7(A) applies; in camera review confirmed disclosure would interfere with the ongoing investigation. |
| Segregability | Plaintiffs seek any non-exempt portions. | FBI contends no reasonably segregable non-exempt information exists or would be meaningless. | Court found some non-exempt sentences in one email thread and ordered release of a redacted version; other minor redactions permitted under Exemption 7(c). |
Key Cases Cited
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (summary judgment standard)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (movant’s burden on summary judgment)
- FBI v. Abramson, 456 U.S. 615 (two-part Exemption 7 inquiry)
- Oglesby v. Department of the Army, 920 F.2d 57 (agency affidavits on search adequacy)
- Valencia-Lucena v. Coast Guard, 180 F.3d 321 (search reasonably calculated to uncover relevant documents)
- CREW v. Department of Justice, 746 F.3d 1082 (deference to agency predictive judgments of harm)
- Am. Immigration Lawyers Ass’n v. Exec. Office for Immigration Review, 830 F.3d 667 (segregability in email chains)
- Morley v. CIA, 508 F.3d 1108 (affirmative duty to consider segregability)