Stein v. U.S. Department of Justice
134 F. Supp. 3d 457
| D.D.C. | 2015Background
- Stein, a FOIA requester, sought six distinct DOJ records from FBI, Civil Division, and EOUSA; DOJ moved for summary judgment on all counts.
- Counts I–II involve FBI records about FOIA processing forms and ACS/FDPS reference materials, respectively; Count III concerns Civil Division monographs.
- Count IV seeks EOUSA USABook Desktop Library content indexed under Freedom of Information; court found EOUSA’s narrow processing improper.
- Count V requests FBI records about Christopher Hitchens; Exemption (b)(7)(D) and (b)(7)(E) issues arise with sources and confidentiality.
- Count VI concerns FBI records about Gwyneth Todd and a fee waiver denial; the court addresses both fee waiver standards and administrative exhaustion.
- Court grants Counts I, II, III, and VI; denies Count IV; grants in part and denies in part Count V, with further Vaughn indexing ordered for some materials.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether WPU Case Evaluation Forms are exempt under (b)(2) only | Stein argues forms are non-purposively broad; not solely internal | FBI claims forms relate solely to internal personnel practices | Yes, exemptions (b)(2) and (b)(6) apply; forms are personnel records and deny disclosure |
| Whether ACS Basic Reference Guide portions are exempt under (b)(7)(E) | Disagreement with withholding scope and harm rationale | Disclosure could risk circumvention of law; information describes techniques/procedures | Yes, (b)(7)(E) applies for withheld ACS content |
| Whether Civil Division monographs are protected by (b)(5) attorney work product | Monographs are nonprivileged and should be disclosed | Monographs are work product tailored to anticipated litigation | Yes, (b)(5) applies; monographs withheld as work product; deliberative process privilege not addressed |
| Whether EOUSA USABook Topic Page processing was proper | FOIA request should cover the Topic Page and contents behind links | Content behind links located off USABook site not responsive | Denied; processing deemed overly narrow; ordered full unredacted Topic Page and Vaughn index for behind-links content |
| Whether FBI records on Hitchens are properly withheld under (b)(7)(D) | Requests non-public info; confidentiality issues unresolved | Most withheld info derived from confidential sources; some pages implicate confidentiality | Partially granted; one page with express confidentiality; 28 pages with implied confidentiality denied; require updated Vaughn index |
| Whether plaintiff is entitled to a fee waiver for Count VI | Waiver justified by public-interest contribution | Contributions not shown; request inadequately specific | No fee waiver; not in public interest; plaintiff bears costs |
Key Cases Cited
- Milner v. Department of the Navy, 562 U.S. 562 (2011) (defines scope of exemption (b)(2) as related to internal personnel rules and practices)
- Shapiro v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 969 F. Supp. 2d 18 (D.D.C. 2013) (distinguishes 'court documents' from agency materials; supports work-product rationale)
- Grolier, Inc. v. FTC, 462 U.S. 19 (1983) (FOIA work-product protection extends to documents prepared in anticipation of litigation)
- Landano v. United States, 508 U.S. 165 (1993) (confidential-source test under (b)(7)(D); implied confidentiality required proof)
- Abramson v. FBI, 456 U.S. 615 (1982) (records compiled for law enforcement continue to be protected when summarized for non-law-enforcement purposes)
- Dent v. EOUSA, 926 F. Supp. 2d 257 (D.D.C. 2013) (cautions against vague, conclusory exemptions; not controlling here)