45 F.4th 343
D.C. Cir.2022Background:
- USDA assigns farm numbers, tract numbers (for plots), and customer numbers (for owners) to administer subsidy programs and tracks related data (crops, land transactions).
- Telematch, a commercial agricultural-data vendor, requested records containing those numbers via FOIA in 2018–19; USDA withheld them under FOIA Exemptions 3 and 6 but released statistical aggregates and some payment info under 7 U.S.C. § 8791(b)(4).
- Congress enacted 7 U.S.C. § 8791 in 2008 after this court’s prior decision in Multi Ag Media LLC v. USDA; § 8791(b)(2) bars disclosure of producer-provided information and geospatial information, with limited exceptions.
- The district court treated USDA’s asserted facts as admitted (Telematch did not contest them), granted summary judgment for USDA, and held farm/tract numbers are geospatial information under § 8791(b)(2)(B) and customer numbers are protected under Exemption 6.
- On appeal, the D.C. Circuit reviewed de novo whether § 8791 and FOIA Exemptions 3 and 6 permit withholding the requested numbers and affirmed.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether farm and tract numbers are "geospatial information" under § 8791(b)(2)(B) (Exemption 3) | Farm/tract numbers are mere identifiers not "geospatial"; the term requires overlay/graphic or dataset form | "Geospatial information" includes any information tied to a specific location; numbers identify parcels and are like addresses/coordinates | Farm and tract numbers are geospatial information and may be withheld under Exemption 3 via § 8791(b)(2)(B) |
| Whether customer numbers are "similar files" and their disclosure would be a "clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy" (Exemption 6) | Disclosure is needed to monitor USDA program administration and detect fraud; public interest outweighs privacy (relying on Multi Ag) | Customer numbers map to individual producers and reveal sensitive operational/financial information; § 8791 evidences strong congressional privacy judgment and reduces incremental public value | Customer numbers are "similar files"; disclosure would clearly unwarrantedly invade privacy and may be withheld under Exemption 6 |
| Whether other statutory or agency definitions limit "geospatial information" to graphical/vector datasets | Statutory definitions (Geospatial Data Act, NGA statute) and agency guidance show geospatial info requires graphic/vector/raster representation | Those definitions do not constrain the ordinary meaning of "geospatial information" in § 8791; ordinary meaning includes data tied to locations | Court rejected narrowing; ordinary meaning controls and covers identifiers tied to locations (e.g., farm/tract numbers) |
Key Cases Cited
- Multi Ag Media LLC v. USDA, 515 F.3d 1224 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (earlier D.C. Cir. decision weighing privacy vs. public interest in releasing farm/tract identifiers)
- Corley v. DOJ, 998 F.3d 981 (D.C. Cir. 2021) (standards for Exemption 3 analysis)
- Central Platte Natural Resources Dist. v. USDA, 643 F.3d 1142 (8th Cir. 2011) (upholding USDA withholding GIS data including farm/tract numbers under § 8791)
- Center for Biological Diversity v. USDA, 626 F.3d 1113 (9th Cir. 2010) (treating coordinates as geospatial information under § 8791)
- U.S. Dep’t of State v. Washington Post Co., 456 U.S. 595 (1982) ("similar files" concept under Exemption 6)
- Consumers’ Checkbook Ctr. for the Study of Servs. v. HHS, 554 F.3d 1046 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (privacy-interest threshold and balancing framework under Exemption 6)
- Nat’l Ass’n of Retired Fed. Emps. v. Horner, 879 F.2d 873 (D.C. Cir. 1989) (standard on substantial probability of privacy invasion)
- Am. Immigr. Laws. Ass’n v. EOIR, 830 F.3d 667 (D.C. Cir. 2016) ("incremental value" standard when assessing public interest against privacy)