Yonemoto v. Department of Veterans Affairs
686 F.3d 681
| 9th Cir. | 2011Background
- Yonemoto, VA employee, requested FOIA/Privacy Act emails (May 2005–Apr. 2006) from VA; VA produced ~1500 pages, withholding some records; district court granted partial summary judgment up to Exemptions; VA offered 157 emails to Yonemoto as VA employee, claiming mootness; Yonemoto appealed; panel remanded for district court to consider exemptions de novo; nine emails viewed in camera remained in dispute; ultimately this court addresses mootness and Exemption 6 issues and remands for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mootness of 157 emails offered to Yonemoto as VA employee | Yonemoto asserts the offer did not moot FOIA rights because dissemination restrictions still withhold records | VA contends offer moot because records produced, even with restrictions | Not moot; require de novo analysis of exemptions on remand |
| Exemption 6 applicability to nine in-camera emails | Yonemoto argues redactions improperly withheld; Vaughn index insufficient | VA contends Exemption 6 permits withholding | Remanded for record-by-record Balancing with a proper Vaughn index |
| Categorical privacy ruling by district court | Court erred in blanket privacy finding without individualized analysis | Not expressly addressed in brief | Remanded for individualized analysis; district court must evaluate each document's privacy/public interests |
Key Cases Cited
- Department of Justice v. Reporters Comm. for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749 (U.S. 1989) (FOIA informs public; core disclosure objective)
- Favish v. Department of U.S. Gov't, 541 U.S. 157 (U.S. 2004) (privacy vs. public interest balancing; nontrivial privacy interests)
- Favish, 541 U.S. 157, 541 U.S. 157 (U.S. 2004) (privacy interests not limited to personal data; death-scene photos example)
- Kissinger v. Reporters Comm. for Freedom of the Press, 445 U.S. 136 (U.S. 1980) (mootness and three-part FOIA duty elements)
- Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1998) (mootness doctrine and standing principles)
- Lahr v. National Transportation Safety Bd., 569 F.3d 964 (9th Cir. 2009) (burden on agency to justify exemptions; de novo review)
- Wiener v. FBI, 943 F.2d 972 (9th Cir. 1991) (context for individualized privacy analysis in Exemption 6)
- Maricopa Audubon Soc’y v. U.S. Forest Serv., 108 F.3d 1082 (9th Cir. 1997) (public disclosure rights; information belongs to public when subject to disclosure)