Morley v. United States Central Intelligence Agency, 245 F. Supp. 3d 74

Plaintiff Jefferson Morley, a journalist, filed a FOIA request in 2003 to the CIA for records concerning CIA officer George Joannides and connections to the JFK assassination and the Cuban activist group DRE.
CIA initially directed Morley to NARA's JFK collection and later produced a total of 524 responsive records (including 113 from files previously transferred to NARA) after litigation and appeals.
Morley sought an award of attorney's fees and costs under FOIA; the district court applied the D.C. Circuit's four-factor test and originally denied fees; the D.C. Circuit vacated and remanded to consider the ex ante likelihood that the request would produce useful new information.
On remand the court evaluated the four Cotton factors (public benefit, commercial benefit, plaintiff’s interest, and reasonableness of government withholding), focusing on whether there was a "decent chance" the request would yield new, useful information when made.
The court found the expectation-adjusted public benefit from Morley’s request was small (search likened to a needle-in-a-haystack), private incentives existed (some commercial benefit and convenience), and the CIA had a reasonable legal basis for resisting disclosure.
Because the fourth factor (reasonable basis for withholding) weighed heavily for the CIA and was dispositive, the court again denied Morley’s renewed motion for fees and costs.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the FOIA public-benefit factor favors awarding fees	Morley argued his request had a decent chance ex ante to produce new, useful JFK-assassination-related information about Joannides and the DRE	CIA argued the request was unlikely to produce useful new information and that many responsive files were already at NARA	Court: public-benefit factor weighed only slightly for plaintiff (expectation-adjusted value small)
Whether plaintiff’s commercial/private incentives negate fee award	Morley claimed public-interest and some commercial benefit (articles, convenience of not searching NARA)	CIA argued plaintiff had private incentives so fees not warranted	Court: private incentives existed; did not strongly favor fees and cut against awarding them
Whether plaintiff’s statutory interest (scholarly/journalistic) supports fees	Morley emphasized scholarly/journalistic purpose in seeking records	CIA noted plaintiff also had private motives and that purpose alone insufficient	Court: plaintiff’s interest present but insufficient to tip balance toward fees
Whether the government had a reasonable basis for withholding (fourth factor)	Morley contended CIA’s resistance was not unreasonable given public interest	CIA maintained it advanced reasonable legal positions and did not act recalcitrantly	Court: fourth factor weighed heavily for CIA and was dispositive; fees denied

Cotton v. Heyman, 63 F.3d 1115 (D.C. Cir. 1995) (sets the four-factor FOIA fee test)
Davy v. Central Intelligence Agency, 550 F.3d 1155 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (requires assessment of potential public value and ex ante likelihood of producing useful new information)
Morley v. Central Intelligence Agency, 810 F.3d 841 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (remanded to consider ex ante chance the request would yield new information)
Nationwide Bldg. Maint., Inc. v. Sampson, 559 F.2d 704 (D.C. Cir. 1977) (purpose of FOIA fee provision to remove economic barriers to litigation)
Fenster v. Brown, 617 F.2d 740 (D.C. Cir. 1979) (public-benefit guidance for FOIA fee awards)
Morley v. Central Intelligence Agency, 828 F. Supp. 2d 257 (D.D.C. 2011) (district-court opinion discussing the four factors)
Maydak v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 579 F. Supp. 2d 105 (D.D.C. 2008) (failure on fourth factor can preclude fee awards)