903 F. Supp. 2d 1
D.D.C.2012Background
- SRS sued the U.S. Department of Transportation for FOIA denial/delay regarding Recall 08C002000 for Evenflo Discovery car seats.
- SRS sought internal and external communications, test reports, and a chronology of events related to the recall, categorized into three records groups.
- NHTSA located responsive material (158 pages, 16 photos, 9 videos); 104 pages were exempt under Exemption 4; 54 pages, 16 photos, 9 videos released on Jan 6, 2012 were all related to category (1).
- NHTSA remanded after initial determination to search elsewhere in its files for potentially responsive records.
- A second search on remand identified 641 pages and one video, mostly internal communications among NHTSA staff, with 23 pages exempt under Exemptions 4 and 5.
- Plaintiff challenged the adequacy of the searches, particularly the lack of search-term disclosure and the handling of backup/archive material.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether NHTSA’s search was adequate under FOIA | SRS contends searches by custodians were inadequately described and possibly incomplete | NHTSA argues searches were reasonably calculated to uncover responsive records; Abbott's terms described; other custodians used reasonable searches | Partially granted; court finds insufficient detail on search terms for nine custodians, thus not adequate as a matter of law. |
| Whether second remand search differed in scope from the first | Second search was too similar to the first, possibly failing to broaden the scope | Second search expanded to include internal communications; results show internal docs | Second search differed in scope; not a basis to invalidate search. |
| Whether FOIA requires disclosure of search terms used by custodians | Nine custodians’ search terms were not provided | No universal terms due to lack of centralized system; Abbott used specific terms | Court requires term-by-term description for all custodians; lack of terms for nine custodians undermines adequacy. |
| Whether backup tapes/backups were required to be searched | Archiv materials and backups could contain responsive docs | Backups not searched; data not in retrievable formats; not required | Not required to search backups; declaration adequate; but issue contributes to overall doubt. |
| Whether lack of identified external communications defeats the search | Evidence suggests external communications with Evenflo existed but were not found | Indications of some external communications do not override search adequacy; methods matter | Given combined evidence, plaintiff prevails on adequacy of search; ordered further search or affidavit. |
Key Cases Cited
- Valencia-Lucena v. U.S. Coast Guard, 180 F.3d 321 (D.C. Cir. 1999) (agency search must be reasonably calculated to uncover relevant documents)
- Truitt v. Dep’t of State, 897 F.2d 540 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (scope and method of FOIA searches; reasonableness standard)
- Oglesby v. U.S. Dep’t of Army, 920 F.2d 57 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (detailed affidavit describing search required)
- Weisberg v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 745 F.2d 1476 (D.C. Cir. 1984) (affidavits must show search terms and search performed)
- Ancient Coin Collectors Guild v. U.S. Dep’t of State, 641 F.3d 504 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (backup/search practicality in FOIA context)
- Iturralde v. Comptroller of the Currency, 315 F.3d 311 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (importance of appropriate methods over fruits of search)
- Judicial Watch v. U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., 857 F. Supp. 2d 129 (D.D.C. 2012) (denials of summary judgment when not all searches described)
- Friends of Blackwater v. U.S. Dep’t of Interior, 391 F. Supp. 2d 115 (D.D.C. 2005) (absence of search terms may threaten adequacy)