80 F. Supp. 3d 211
D.D.C.2015Background
- Plaintiff Jeremy Pinson, a federal inmate, submitted two FOIA requests to DOJ Civil Division: Request No. 145-FOI-10314 (Sept. 2010) seeking documents referencing him after April 2007, and Request No. 145-FOI-10573 (Apr. 2011) seeking all BOP-related settlement agreements challenging conditions/staff at USPADX Florence.
- For Request 10314 the Civil Division located responsive pages, released many, and withheld 84 pages in full under FOIA Exemption 5 and redacted parts of 11 pages under Exemption 6. Pinson did not contest the agency’s withholding in his brief.
- For Request 10573 the Civil Division refused to conduct the requested search, deeming it unreasonably burdensome because its filing/indexing system cannot be queried by BOP facility; it invited Pinson to narrow the request or pursue the BOP.
- Pinson appealed both decisions. The Office of Information Policy affirmed the refusal for Request 10573 on grounds the Civil Division’s retrieval would be unreasonably burdensome.
- The DOJ moved for partial summary judgment: it sought judgment upholding its withholdings for 10314 and its refusal-to-search for 10573. The Court grants summary judgment for the DOJ as to 10314 (conceded by Pinson) but denies summary judgment as to 10573 because the agency’s showing of burden was insufficient.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Civil Division adequately searched and properly withheld documents responsive to Request No. 145-FOI-10314 | Pinson did not press opposition and effectively concedes the adequacy and withholdings | Civil Division conducted adequate search and lawfully withheld pages under Exemptions 5 and 6 | Court: Granted DOJ summary judgment on Request 10314 (plaintiff conceded) |
| Whether Civil Division may refuse to conduct the search for Request No. 145-FOI-10573 as unreasonably burdensome | Pinson contends the agency’s burden claim is conclusory and lacks detail; agency should have tried alternative/narrowed searches | DOJ says the request is incompatible with its indexing and would require manual searching of all Civil Division files, thus unreasonably burdensome | Court: Denied DOJ summary judgment on Request 10573; agency failed to provide sufficient specifics to meet its burden |
Key Cases Cited
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (summary judgment standard and burden allocation)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (materiality and genuine dispute standard)
- Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (definition of genuine dispute)
- Nation Magazine v. U.S. Customs Serv., 71 F.3d 885 (agency must explain why a search is unreasonably burdensome)
- Pub. Citizen, Inc. v. Dep't of Educ., 292 F. Supp. 2d 1 (agency’s vague burden claims rejected)
- Wolf v. CIA, 569 F. Supp. 2d 1 (detailed time/cost estimates can justify finding a search unreasonably burdensome)
- Blakey v. DOJ, 549 F. Supp. 362 (agency limitations in indexing do not automatically excuse search obligations)
- Greenberg v. Dep't of Treasury, 10 F. Supp. 2d 3 (agency’s alternative broader searches can satisfy search obligations)