Tobias v. United States Department of the Interior, Office of the Secretary, Civil Action No. 2018-1368

Plaintiff Jimmy Tobias submitted 22 FOIA requests to the U.S. Department of the Interior seeking records concerning Secretary Ryan Zinke and other senior officials.
Interior produced approximately 1,020 pages but withheld/redacted certain material under FOIA exemption 5 (inter- or intra-agency memoranda and privileged materials).
The agency invoked the deliberative-process privilege, attorney-client privilege, attorney work-product doctrine, and commercial-information privilege, and provided declarations plus a Vaughn Index describing withheld items.
Tobias challenged only the agency’s showing that disclosure would cause foreseeable harm under 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(8)(A)(i)(I), and did not contest the applicability of the asserted privileges.
The court reviewed the declarations and Vaughn Index, found the agency specifically focused on the withheld information and adequately explained why disclosure "would" cause harm, and concluded the foreseeability requirement was met.
Court granted Defendant’s motion for summary judgment and denied Tobias’s cross-motion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether DOI properly invoked FOIA Exemption 5 privileges	Tobias did not dispute privilege application	DOI asserted deliberative-process, attorney-client, work-product, and commercial- information privileges	Court treated privilege application as conceded because Tobias focused only on foreseeability
Whether DOI demonstrated foreseeable harm from disclosure (statutory requirement)	Disclosure would not cause the requisite foreseeable harm; agency failed its burden	Declarations and Vaughn Index show disclosure "would" chill deliberations and harm protected interests	Court held DOI met the foreseeable-harm requirement and withholding was permissible
Whether agency declarations and Vaughn Index were sufficiently specific	Tobias argued agency’s showing was inadequate (narrow focus of challenge)	DOI provided itemized Vaughn Index and declarations tied to each withholding	Court found the Vaughn Index and declarations sufficiently specific and persuasive
Appropriateness of summary judgment on FOIA claims	Tobias sought summary judgment ordering disclosure	DOI sought summary judgment upholding withholdings	Court granted defendant’s MSJ and denied plaintiff’s MSJ

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (summary judgment standard for genuine disputes)
Machado Amadis v. U.S. Dep’t of State, 971 F.3d 364 (clarifying the FOIA foreseeable-harm requirement)
Elec. Priv. Info. Ctr. v. U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., 777 F.3d 518 (court reviews permissibility of agency non-disclosure)
Loving v. Dep’t of Def., 550 F.3d 32 (Exemption 5 incorporates traditional privileges)
Baker & Hostetler LLP v. U.S. Dep’t of Commerce, 473 F.3d 312 (same)
NLRB v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 421 U.S. 132 (deliberative-process privilege protects candid internal discussions)
United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (public dissemination may chill candor)
DiBacco v. U.S. Army, 795 F.3d 178 (FOIA's general disclosure rule)
Ullah v. CIA, 435 F. Supp. 3d 177 (FOIA cases frequently decided on summary judgment)