143 F.4th 481
D.C. Cir.2025Background
- Gary Sebastian Brown, III filed a FOIA request to the FBI for witness accounts related to the 2015 San Bernardino terrorist attack in California, specifically seeking details about the perpetrators.
- The FBI initially responded with previously released records and, after Brown’s follow-up, conducted a second, targeted search within its Central Records System.
- The FBI located 411 pages, of which many were redacted or withheld under various FOIA exemptions related to law enforcement and personal privacy concerns, ultimately providing Brown 406 pages.
- After Brown’s administrative appeal failed, he filed a pro se action in district court; when the investigation closed, the FBI re-processed the request and again withheld/redacted some documents on exemption grounds.
- The district court granted summary judgment to the FBI, holding the FBI’s search reasonable and its application of FOIA exemptions valid; Brown appealed the decision alongside a court-appointed amicus.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adequacy of FBI's FOIA search | FBI’s search was too narrow, omitting relevant records beyond witness interviews | Search was reasonable, targeted, and consistent with request as drafted | FBI’s search was adequate under FOIA |
| Use of Exemptions 6 & 7(C) | Redactions/withholdings were overbroad and not limited to personal information | Redactions protected personal privacy, with foreseeable harm adequately articulated | Exemptions properly invoked for third-party privacy |
| Use of Exemption 7(D) | FBI did not prove all sources were confidential; redactions too broad | Witnesses had implied confidentiality due to crime’s nature and risk of retaliation | Exemption 7(D) properly applied due to implied confidentiality |
| In camera review of redactions | District court should have reviewed records in camera for overbroad redactions | No evidence of bad faith; declaration sufficient; no contradiction in record | Denial of in camera review was not an abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Oglesby v. United States Department of Army, 920 F.2d 57 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (explains agency search obligations under FOIA)
- Nation Magazine, Washington Bureau v. United States Customs Service, 71 F.3d 885 (D.C. Cir. 1995) (describes duty to construe FOIA requests liberally)
- Miller v. Casey, 730 F.2d 773 (D.C. Cir. 1984) (agency only required to read FOIA request as drafted)
- SafeCard Services, Inc. v. SEC, 926 F.2d 1197 (D.C. Cir. 1991) (balance public and privacy interests under FOIA Exemption 7(C))
- United States Department of Justice v. Landano, 508 U.S. 165 (1993) (standard for implied assurances of confidentiality under Exemption 7(D))
- Judicial Watch, Inc. v. United States Department of Defense, 715 F.3d 937 (D.C. Cir. 2013) (agency burden for justifying FOIA exemption)