892 F. Supp. 2d 319
D.D.C.2012Background
- FOIA/Privacy Act request by plaintiff to TSA/DHS for records; case posture is summary judgment, with plaintiff pro se initially and later counsel.
- Plaintiff, a US citizen living in Israel, alleges prior travel-related detentions and a 1998 Egypt incident affecting watchlist status.
- TSA acknowledged the request and issued extensions; later produced documents with redactions under Exemptions 3, 6, and 7 (later withdrawn).
- Defendants moved for summary judgment claiming adequate search and proper withholding; plaintiff argued bad faith and improper searches.
- Court finds no genuine material fact dispute and grants defendants’ summary judgment while denying plaintiff’s cross-motion.
- Court also addresses segregability and denies attorneys’ fees to plaintiff.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether TSA/DHS search for records was adequate | Skrow contends search was inadequate and partial. | TSA conducted a reasonable, good-faith search across OTSR, OI, and OSO with relevant terms. | Yes; search deemed adequate. |
| Whether Exemption 3 applies to withholdings under 114(r) | Section 114(r) should not shield release; Glomar/waiver issues raised. | 114(r) properly used to withhold SSI; Glomar disclosure not compelled. | Exemption 3 valid; Glomar appropriate; 114(r) applies. |
| Whether Exemption 6 justifies withholding of personal information | Redactions violate privacy/public interest balancing. | Redactions for names/phones of employees involved in DHS TRIP are permissible. | Exemption 6 valid; redactions upheld. |
| Whether the material can be segregated and non-exempt portions released | Requests non-exempt portions; argues insufficient segregability. | Very limited, specific redactions; non-exempt material disclosed. | All segregable information disclosed. |
| Whether plaintiff is entitled to attorneys’ fees | Fees should be awarded for cross-motion work. | Plaintiff’s counsel appeared late; fees inappropriate for FOIA relief. | No attorneys’ fees awarded. |
Key Cases Cited
- Iturralde v. Comptroller of the Currency, 315 F.3d 311 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (FOIA search adequacy focused on reasonable methodology)
- Weisberg v. Dep’t of Justice, 705 F.2d 1344 (D.C. Cir. 1983) (Reasonableness of search and good faith standard)
- Mead Data Cent., Inc. v. Dep’t of Air Force, 566 F.2d 242 (D.C. Cir. 1977) (Segregability requirement for non-exempt portions)
- Electronic Privacy Information Center v. DHS, 384 F. Supp. 2d 100 (D.D.C. 2005) (FOIA exemptions and exemptions application (local; cited for context))
- A.C.L.U. v. Dep’t of the Defense, 628 F.3d 612 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (Affirmative justification under FOIA exemptions; strong deference to agency declarations)