Warren v. Colvin
744 F.3d 841
2d Cir.2014Background
- Warren, proceeding pro se, appeals a district court judgment dismissing his Privacy Act damages claim and FOIA litigation costs.
- The Privacy Act permits access to records; it does not authorize accessing information about another individual’s records that is not retrieved by the requester’s own identifying information.
- SSA voluntarily provided the requested records in August 2012, after Warren filed suit, causing Warren to drop injunctive relief while continuing to pursue damages and fees.
- On appeal, Warren has abandoned FOIA damages and Privacy Act litigation costs, leaving only Privacy Act damages and FOIA costs issues for review.
- The case is reviewed de novo for dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) and for fees under FOIA; Warren is afforded liberal pro se construction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Privacy Act right of access applies to own records only | Warren contends the records pertain to him and should be accessible | Records must be retrievable by reference to the requester’s own name/identifier | Privacy Act does not grant access to records about another person; dismissal affirmed |
| FOIA fee shifting after voluntary agency compliance | Warren seeks recovery of costs after agency complied | Buckhannon does not apply to FOIA; costs may be recovered only if substantially prevailed | FOIA allows costs when agency voluntarily complies; remand for $350 in costs |
Key Cases Cited
- Sussman v. U.S. Marshals Serv., 494 F.3d 1106 (D.C. Cir.2007) (access limits to information keyed to requester’s identity)
- Cuccaro v. Sec’y of Labor, 770 F.2d 355 (3d Cir.1985) (guidance that access is only to records keyed to requester)
- Boyd v. Sec’y of Navy, 709 F.2d 684 (11th Cir.1983) (records must be keyed to the requester to be subject to disclosure)
- Harris v. Mills, 572 F.3d 66 (2d Cir.2009) (de novo review and liberal construction for pro se)
- Hill v. Curcione, 657 F.3d 116 (2d Cir.2011) (liberal pleading standard for pro se)
- Buckhannon Bd. & Care Home, Inc. v. West Virginia Dept. of Health & Human Resources, 532 U.S. 598 (U.S.2001) (abrogated Buckhannon rule for FOIA prevailing)
- Brayton v. Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, 641 F.3d 521 (D.C.Cir.2011) (FOIA fees available when agency voluntarily complies)