Sack v. United States Department of Defense
2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 9225
| D.C. Cir. | 2016Background
- Kathryn Sack, a Ph.D. student at the University of Virginia, submitted FOIA requests to the Department of Defense for reports and documents about polygraph examinations to use in her dissertation.
- Sack asked to be treated as an "educational-institution" requester (which limits fees to duplication costs only); the DoD refused for one batch and charged about $900 for search costs.
- For another batch, DoD located responsive polygraph reports but withheld them under FOIA Exemption 7(E) (techniques/procedures and risk of circumvention).
- Sack sued; the district court granted summary judgment to DoD on both fee classification and Exemption 7(E) withholding, and dismissed certain claims in a separate prior suit.
- The D.C. Circuit reversed the fee-classification ruling (holding students seeking records to further coursework/school activities can qualify as "educational institution" requesters) and affirmed the district court on Exemption 7(E) and segregability; it lacked jurisdiction to review the prior-case dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a student’s FOIA request made to further coursework or school-sponsored activities qualifies as a request by an "educational institution" (fee category) | Sack: students are part of the educational institution and thus eligible for reduced fees when requests further coursework/school activities | DoD/OMB: Guidelines exclude student coursework requests as individual (not institutional) research and thus not eligible for reduced fees | The court held students pursuing coursework or school-sponsored activities may qualify as educational-institution requesters; agencies may require reasonable verification but not burdensome proof; reversed district court on fees |
| Whether the requested polygraph reports were compiled for law enforcement purposes and exempt under FOIA Exemption 7(E) (technique/procedures and risk of circumvention) | Sack: portions were releasable and reasonably segregable; reports should not be fully withheld | DoD: reports relate to law enforcement use of polygraphs, reveal techniques/procedures, and disclosure would risk circumvention; withheld as exempt and not reasonably segregable | The court held the reports were compiled for law enforcement, fell within Exemption 7(E), and agreed with the district court that material was not reasonably segregable; affirmed |
| Whether the court could review a prior district-court dismissal (Rule 21) of non-CIA defendants from an earlier suit | Sack: sought review of that prior dismissal order | DoD: the prior order dismissed claims from a different case not before the appellate court | The court held it lacked jurisdiction to review the unrelated prior-case dismissal |
Key Cases Cited
- National Security Archive v. Department of Defense, 880 F.2d 1381 (D.C. Cir.) (ordinary meaning of "educational institution")
- Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Services, Inc., 545 U.S. 546 (2005) (textualist focus on statute)
- Milner v. Department of the Navy, 131 S. Ct. 1259 (2011) (discussion of law enforcement including proactive security measures)
- Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility v. U.S. Section, International Boundary and Water Commission, U.S.-Mexico, 740 F.3d 195 (D.C. Cir.) (definition and scope of law enforcement purpose under Exemption 7)
- Morley v. CIA, 508 F.3d 1108 (D.C. Cir.) (background investigations relate to law enforcement)
- Blackwell v. FBI, 646 F.3d 37 (D.C. Cir.) (requirements for Exemption 7(E))