ACLU of Me. Found. v. USCIS, No. 20-00422, 2022 WL 4298419 (D. Me. Sept. 19, 2022) (Woodcock, Jr., J.)

ACLU of Me. Found. v. USCIS, No. 20-00422, 2022 WL 4298419 (D. Me. Sept. 19, 2022) (Woodcock, Jr., J.)

Re:  Request for certain records concerning asylum applications processed by two regional offices

Disposition:  Adopting magistrate judge’s recommendation; granting in part and denying in part plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment

• Procedural Requirements, Searching for Responsive Records:  The court holds that “Defendant should not be ‘required to search for and produce notices created by the Boston Asylum Office informing asylum seekers whether their applications have been denied or referred.’”  “The Court concludes that the Defendant has the better argument precisely for the reasons the Magistrate Judge described in his May 31, 2022 Recommended Decision.”  The magistrate judge previously found that “[t]he record establishes that the denial and referral notices are in multiple locations and review of the requested documents would require thousands of person-hours to review.”  “Defendant, therefore, has demonstrated that its decision not to search the A-Files for the denial and referral notices was reasonable.”
   
• Exemption 6:  The court finds that defendant must release “the information it withheld pursuant to Exemption 6 except for email addresses, phone numbers, applicant names, addresses, names of relatives, addresses of relatives, school addresses, dates of significance related to important events within the applicant's personal history, churches attended, and other family and/or personal history.”
   
• Exemption 7(E):  The court finds that defendant must release “the information it withheld pursuant to [Exemption 7(E)] on [certain] pages” following an in camera inspection.  The court “grants the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment . . . on all remaining issues and disputed pages and on the [Exemption 7(E)] redactions.”