Moffat v. United States Deparment of Justice
716 F.3d 244
1st Cir.2013Background
- Moffat, a FOIA plaintiff, sought FBI records he believes would exonerate him from a Massachusetts murder conviction.
- The FBI produced 16 pages with heavy redactions and withheld four as duplicates, invoking Exemptions 6, 7(C), and 7(D).
- The central document at issue is an FBI 302 report from December 9, 1999, with references to an informant and a man named “Screw” describing the murder scene.
- Moffat filed suit in December 2009 after administrative searches failed; the FBI later conducted “main file” and then cross-reference searches, yielding 20 pages of responsive material.
- The district court granted summary judgment for the government and reduced the requested attorneys’ fees; it also fixed a CPCS-rate-based hourly fee, which Moffat challenged on appeal.
- The First Circuit affirmed the district court’s summary judgment and fee award, upholding the exemptions and the fee calculation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Exemption 7(C) supports withholding the FBI 302 in full. | Moffat argues privacy interests are diminished by update/public disclosure. | FBI privacy interests and public disclosure balance favor exemption. | Exemption 7(C) properly applied. |
| Whether Exemption 7(D) supports withholding information from the FBI 302. | 7(D) should not apply to information already publicly revealed. | 7(D) protection remains notwithstanding partial disclosure. | Exemption 7(D) validly applied to all redacted information. |
| Whether the government acted in bad faith in handling FOIA requests. | Redactions and exemptions show bad faith and lack of good faith search. | Exemptions properly applied; search conducted reasonably. | No triable issue; search and handling not shown in bad faith. |
| Whether the district court abused its discretion in calculating fees. | CPCS-rate should not fix the attorney’s rate; requested $225/hr justified. | Court’s CPCS-based rate was appropriate given lack of supporting evidence. | No abuse of discretion; fee award affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Carpenter v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 470 F.3d 434 (1st Cir. 2006) (FOIA exemptions construed narrowly; public interest favored disclosure when possible)
- Maynard v. CIA, 986 F.2d 547 (1st Cir. 1993) (Exemption 7(C) balance against privacy in FOIA requests)
- National Archives & Records Admin. v. Favish, 541 U.S. 157 (Supreme Court, 2004) (requires a meaningful evidentiary showing of public interest in disclosure)
- Irons v. FBI, 880 F.2d 1446 (1st Cir. 1989) (Confidential-source protection under Exemption 7(D) persists after public disclosure of some information)
- New Eng. Apple Council v. Donovan, 725 F.2d 139 (1st Cir. 1984) (Exemption 7(C) not limited to cases of harassment; public interest varies with context)