Pinson v. U.S. Department of Justice
61 F. Supp. 3d 164
D.D.C.2015Background
- Plaintiff Jeremy Pinson, a federal inmate, submitted multiple FOIA requests to DOJ OIG between 2010–2013; he sued alleging unlawful withholding/non-response.
- DOJ moved to dismiss or for summary judgment, arguing (a) lack of administrative exhaustion for several requests, (b) that adequate searches were performed and non-exempt material released for others, and (c) that some requests were never received.
- OIG located and released records (with redactions under Exemptions 6 and 7(C)) for some requests; for one consolidated request the OIG produced documents for Part One (records about Pinson) but returned a "no records" response for Part Two (related to a specified criminal case).
- OIG issued a Glomar (neither confirm nor deny) response for a request about third party Jamil Abdullah Al‑Amin.
- The Court evaluated DOJ’s motion under the summary‑judgment standard, granted summary judgment in part and denied in part: it found some exhaustion failures fatal, approved some searches/withholdings, but ordered further search and production in other respects.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Failure to exhaust administrative remedies (Requests: 11‑OIG‑150, 12‑OIG‑09, 13‑OIG‑206, April 2013) | Pinson contends he never received OIG response letters so could not appeal; therefore exhaustion is excused. | DOJ: Pinson received the response letters and did not appeal; claims unexhausted. | Court: Concedes April 2013 claim (no response to DOJ brief). For 11‑OIG‑150, 12‑OIG‑09, 13‑OIG‑206, court accepts Pinson's earlier verified complaint dates over later contradictory affidavit and grants summary judgment to DOJ for failure to exhaust. |
| Adequacy of search for records about Pinson (Part One of 11‑OIG‑15) | Pinson says produced records reference other messages/handwritten notes not produced, so search was inadequate. | DOJ describes electronic search of OIG investigative database by name and release of responsive documents (with redactions). | Court: DOJ affidavit sufficiently detailed; search was reasonably calculated to find responsive files. Summary judgment for DOJ as to Part One. |
| Adequacy of search for records related to E.D.N.Y. case No. 07‑CR‑00273 (Part Two of 11‑OIG‑15) | Pinson points to public/state court materials showing OIG investigated the defendants and provides defendants’ names. | DOJ searched OIG investigative database using the case number and reported no responsive records. | Court: Search was not reasonably calculated to locate records because database is name‑indexed, DOJ failed to ask for clarification, and evidence showed OIG had investigated those defendants. Denies summary judgment; orders new search using defendant names provided by Pinson. |
| Production / mailing of responsive documents (11‑OIG‑49) | Pinson says he never received documents that OIG admits it located; disputes DOJ’s assertion mail was returned. | DOJ: responsive documents were mailed but returned "to sender" by BOP, so obligation satisfied. | Court: Genuine dispute of material fact: DOJ failed to produce the alleged return‑to‑sender exhibit; Pinson swears he received no mail or BOP notice. Denies summary judgment and directs OIG to provide responsive documents. |
| Glomar response re: third‑party records (12‑OIG‑257 for Al‑Amin) | Pinson asserts he provided a signed DOJ Form 361 (consent) and Al‑Amin signed an affidavit authorizing release. | DOJ issued Glomar because confirming/denying existence of third‑party investigatory records would invade privacy; no evidence OIG received a consent before issuing Glomar. | Court: Grants summary judgment to DOJ. Plaintiff failed to show OIG received timely proof of third‑party consent or that public interest overcomes the privacy interest. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wilbur v. CIA, 355 F.3d 675 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (FOIA administrative exhaustion requirement and consequences)
- Hidalgo v. FBI, 344 F.3d 1256 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (treatment of exhaustion issues and dismissal vs. summary judgment)
- Nation Magazine v. United States Customs Serv., 71 F.3d 885 (D.C. Cir. 1995) (standards for adequacy of agency search)
- SafeCard Servs., Inc. v. SEC, 926 F.2d 1197 (D.C. Cir. 1991) (presumption of good faith for agency affidavits; speculative assertions insufficient)
- Military Audit Project v. Casey, 656 F.2d 724 (D.C. Cir. 1981) (affidavits can support Glomar/withholding where justified and uncontested)
- Ogelsby v. U.S. Dep't of Army, 920 F.2d 57 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (agency obligation to produce when records located and time limits)