Labow v. U.S. Department of Justice
2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123093
| D.D.C. | 2014Background
- Labow, a FOIA requester, sued DOJ alleging improper processing of his requests for records from the FBI.
- DOJ moved for summary judgment, asserting a reasonable search, production of responsive records, and lawful withholding under exemptions.
- FBI located and released some records after Labow’s initial 2011 FOIA request; a second request in 2012 involved records about a private individual Kuhn.
- DOJ relied on Exemptions 1, 3, 6, 7 and an exclusion under 5 U.S.C. § 552(c); it submitted detailed declarations (Hardy) explaining classifications and withholdings.
- Labow argued the search was inadequate and the government failed to justify certain redactions, including exemptions under Exemption 1 and 7; the court later permitted an ex parte in-camera declaration addressing an exclusion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adequacy of the search under FOIA | Labow argues the FBI search was inadequate | DOJ contends the search was reasonably calculated to locate responsive records | Granted to DOJ; search deemed adequate |
| Exemption 1 applicability | Labow challenges classification and national security harm reasoning | DOJ shows proper classification and harm-based rationale under EO 13526 | DOJ entitled to summary judgment on Exemption 1 withholdings |
| Exemption 3 (and National Security Act) use | Labow disputes use of National Security Act and 18 U.S.C. § 3123 to justify withholding | DOJ sustains withholding under Exemption 3 and related statutes | Summary judgment for DOJ on Exemption 3 grounds |
| Exemption 7 (A, D, E) arguments | Labow challenges 7(A) categorization and 7(D)/7(E) specifics | DOJ justifies withholdings under 7(A), 7(D), and 7(E) with tailored declarations | DOJ granted on Exemption 7 grounds; segregability findings upheld |
| Segregability and ex parte disclosures | Labow argues non-exempt information could be released | Withholdings deemed non-segregable where necessary to protect exemptions | Court accepts the agency's segregability analysis; no release of non-exempt material |
Key Cases Cited
- Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of Defense, 715 F.3d 937 (D.C. Cir. 2013) (deference to national security affidavits; harm analysis must be plausible)
- CIA v. Sims, 471 U.S. 159 (S. Ct. 1985) (court deference to executive judgment in national security matters)
- Johnson v. Exec. Office for U.S. Attorneys, 310 F.3d 771 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (limits of segregability and line-by-line review emphasis)
- King v. Dep’t of Justice, 830 F.2d 210 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (necessity of describing withheld information to support exemptions; Vaughn index sufficiency)
- Pratt v. Webster, 673 F.2d 408 (D.C. Cir. 1982) (FOIA right of access framework and exemptions discussion)