Shapiro v. U.S. Department of Justice
177 F. Supp. 3d 467
D.D.C.2016Background
- Plaintiffs (Shapiro, Stein, National Security Counselors, Truthout) sued DOJ/FBI under FOIA challenging the FBI’s categorical denial policy for administrative processing records (search slips and processing notes).
- Court issued a January 22, 2016 opinion rejecting the FBI’s categorical withholdings and identifying records for further briefing; parties then submitted a joint status report about next steps.
- FBI disclosed it adopted a new, narrower policy in May 2015 (denying only records tied to underlying "No Records" or Glomar responses) but did not notify the Court or plaintiffs until the status report.
- FBI asked permission to apply its new policy to the pending case and to assert additional document-by-document exemptions it had not previously advanced; plaintiffs opposed.
- The Court applied D.C. Circuit precedent (Maydak/August) and denied the FBI’s attempt to rely on the new policy, but allowed limited, targeted, untimely exemption claims only where nondisclosure is necessary to avoid compromising national security or sensitive personal information.
- The Court ordered production of responsive records by May 10, 2016 (with narrow exceptions), allowed a renewed FBI summary-judgment motion for narrowly identified withholdings, set a schedule for cross-motions, and denied entry of partial final judgment for Shapiro pending resolution of remaining claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether FBI may apply its May 2015 new categorical policy to these pending FOIA requests | New policy is invalid; plaintiffs sought declaratory/injunctive relief against categorical use of Exemption (b)(7)(E) | FBI seeks to apply its narrower May 2015 policy to avoid production | Denied: FBI cannot invoke the new policy here because timing reflects tactical change, not an allowed Maydak exception; may apply policy to future requests only |
| Whether FBI may assert additional, document-by-document FOIA exemptions now | Plaintiffs argue FBI waived untimely, unspecified exemptions by relying on categorical theory | FBI says it reserved other exemptions and erred in not asserting them specifically | Mostly denied: May assert untimely exemptions only for records whose disclosure would compromise national security or sensitive personal/private information; otherwise waived under Maydak |
| Whether further briefing is required on declaratory and injunctive relief invalidating the old policy | Plaintiffs seek declaratory judgment and permanent injunction without more briefing | FBI contends relief may be unnecessary because it has abandoned the policy | Court ordered additional briefing limited to necessity and standards for declaratory and injunctive relief; plaintiffs may brief in cross-motion |
| Whether court should enter partial final judgment for Shapiro now | Shapiro seeks Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) final judgment since court rejected FBI exemptions for his request | FBI opposes, citing possible new targeted withholdings and new policy application | Denied: Court will withhold final judgment until remaining limited exemption issues are resolved; final judgment will follow complete resolution |
Key Cases Cited
- Maydak v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 218 F.3d 760 (D.C. Cir. 2000) (generally requires agencies to assert all FOIA exemptions at once; allows two narrow exceptions)
- August v. FBI, 328 F.3d 697 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (applies Maydak exceptions where government’s omission was a reasonable mistake and disclosure would jeopardize safety/privacy)
- Senate of Puerto Rico v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 823 F.2d 574 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (FOIA’s policy favors prompt and full disclosure; courts value finality and efficiency)
- eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, LLC, 547 U.S. 388 (2006) (sets traditional four-factor test for permanent injunctions)