HALL v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
1:16-cv-01591
D.D.C.Sep 19, 2017Background
- Plaintiff (federal prisoner) filed FOIA requests with DOJ components (ATF, DEA, Criminal Division, EOUSA, BOP) seeking records related to his criminal prosecution; FBI separately released records.
- ATF searched TECS and N-Force by name, SSN, and DOB, found no records, and notified plaintiff (no administrative appeal to OIP).
- BOP rejected plaintiff’s overly broad request for “all phone records” as not reasonably described; OIP agreed and asked plaintiff to narrow or clarify; plaintiff did not supply clarifying information.
- DEA searched NADDIS/IFRS by name, SSN, and DOB, found no responsive records; OIP affirmed adequacy.
- Criminal Division routed the request to EOUSA at the administrative level, then (in response to the lawsuit) searched its Electronic Surveillance Unit records by name (no results); EOUSA said plaintiff failed to provide a required Certification of Identity but may have received a routed certification from the Criminal Division — the parties did not brief the significance of that fact.
- Procedural posture: Defendants (except FBI) moved to dismiss or for summary judgment. Court grants summary judgment for ATF, DEA, and Criminal Division; dismisses BOP claim without prejudice for failure to exhaust; denies EOUSA’s motion without prejudice to renewal or processing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether agency searches were adequate | Hall contends agencies failed to produce records requested | Agencies contend they conducted reasonable searches of the systems likely to contain records | ATF, DEA, and Criminal Division searches were adequate; summary judgment for those agencies |
| Failure to exhaust administrative remedies (BOP) | Hall proceeded to court despite BOP/OIP asking for clarification | BOP/ OIP argue request was not reasonably described and plaintiff failed to perfect it | BOP claim dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust |
| Failure to exhaust / Certification of Identity (EOUSA) | Hall implied he provided or attempted to provide required ID verification | EOUSA says plaintiff failed to supply certification and closed request; but EOUSA may have received a routed certification from Criminal Division | Court denied EOUSA’s motion without prejudice; requested clarification or processing before resolution |
| Whether constructive exhaustion occurred for routed request | Hall argues routing and delay may amount to constructive exhaustion | EOUSA/Criminal Division did not adequately explain handling of routed request | Court declined to resolve without further briefing or agency action; denied EOUSA’s motion without prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- McGehee v. CIA, 697 F.2d 1095 (D.C. Cir. 1983) (FOIA jurisdiction to enjoin improper withholding)
- Kissinger v. Reporters Comm. for Freedom of the Press, 445 U.S. 136 (U.S. 1980) (scope of FOIA review and jurisdiction)
- Valencia-Lucena v. U.S. Coast Guard, 180 F.3d 321 (D.C. Cir. 1999) (adequacy of agency search and the role of affidavits)
- Oglesby v. United States Dep't of the Army, 920 F.2d 57 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (agency affidavits may justify summary judgment when they describe search methods)
- Defenders of Wildlife v. U.S. Border Patrol, 623 F. Supp. 2d 83 (D.D.C. 2009) (FOIA cases commonly decided on summary judgment)