Block v. DOJ, No. 19-03073, 2022 WL 683569 (D.D.C. Mar. 8, 2022) (Nichols, J.)

Block v. DOJ, No. 19-03073, 2022 WL 683569 (D.D.C. Mar. 8, 2022) (Nichols, J.)

Re:  Request for records concerning plaintiff

Disposition:  Granting defendants' motion for summary judgment

• Procedural Requirements, Searching for Responsive Records:  "In brief, EOUSA had the U.S. Attorney's Office perform a search for records keyed to [plaintiff's] name." "EOUSA then reviewed all such documents or referred them to the relevant sub-agency for processing."  "EOUSA also produced the entire electronic file for [plaintiff's] cases, including emails, correspondence, and documents."  "[Plaintiff] does not contest the adequacy of the search."  "Regardless, the Court has independently reviewed the motion and concludes that the government has provided undisputed evidence that its search was reasonable."
   
• Litigation Considerations, Vaughn Index/Declaration:  "Although there is some ambiguity in his opposition, it appears [plaintiff] does not object to the adequacy of the Vaughn index for [EOUSA's] records."  "In any event, the EOUSA Vaughn index describes each record, notes the reasons for withholdings, and provides comments explaining why the applicable exemptions apply."  "The Court concludes that the government has met its obligation to provide a Vaughn index as to the EOUSA withholdings."  "As to DEA records . . . [t]he Court concludes that the DEA's Vaughn index is now adequate."  "While the government failed to include the Vaughn index in its initial motion and thereby deprived [plaintiff] of the opportunity to contest the withholdings during initial briefing, the Court provided [plaintiff] another opportunity to contest the government's withholdings after the index was filed."
   
• Exemption 3:  "The government applied this exemption to grand jury materials and other records that would disclose grand jury proceedings."  "[Plaintiff] has not objected to these withholdings."  "The Court concludes that the government has met its burden with regard to the Rule 6(e) records withheld through Exemption 3."
   
• Exemption 5, Deliberative Process Privilege & Attorney Work-Product Privilege:  "Here, EOUSA withheld or redacted a handful of attorney emails regarding ongoing litigation, asserting the work product doctrine or the deliberative process privilege or both"  "[Plaintiff] has not objected to these withholdings."  "The Court concludes that the government has met its burden with regard to the Exemption 5 withholdings."
   
• Exemption 6 & Exemption (7)(C):  "Here, the government withheld or redacted information in EOUSA documents pertaining to co-defendants and counsel, as well as an employee's personal information."  "And, for DEA records, the government asserted Exemption 6 (in combination with Exemption 7(C)) to withhold 130 pages in full because they are investigatory records in which [plaintiff] is not the subject."  "The government also redacted personal information of third parties found on 148 pages related to investigation reports, warrants and affidavits, and various criminal reports."  "[Plaintiff] has not objected to these withholdings."  "The Court concludes that the government has met its burden with regard to the Exemption 6 withholdings."  "[Exemption (7)(C)] is a broader standard than Exemption 6 and was used largely concurrently with that exemption."  "The Court concludes that the government has met its burden under this provision for the same reasons."
   
• Exemption (7)(D):  "The government invoked 7(D) to withhold 29 pages of reports that include information about or derived from DEA's coded confidential sources."  "[Plaintiff] has not objected to these withholdings."  "The Court concludes that the government has met its burden with regard to the Exemption 7(D) withholdings."
   
• Exemption (7)(E):  "Under this exemption, the government redacted portions of 114 pages of DEA records, including records from various investigation reports and warrants. Hertel Decl."  "[Plaintiff] has not objected to these withholdings."  "The Court concludes that the government has met its burden with regard to the Exemption 7(E) withholdings."
   
• Exemption (7)(F):  "Under this exemption, the government redacted portions of 147 pages of DEA records, including third-party personal information in various reports and search warrants."  "These redactions were usually made in conjunction with Exemptions 7(C) and 6."  "These redactions are all in relation to the drug trade, which is often the subject to violence."  "[Plaintiff] has not objected to these withholdings."  "The Court concludes that the government has met its burden with regard to the Exemption 7(F) withholdings."
   
• Litigation Considerations, "Reasonably Segregable" Requirements:  "The government has presented affidavits that persons experienced in FOIA have reviewed the documents and concluded there are no reasonably segregable non-exempt portions that can be released."  "The high number of documents that were only partially redacted rather than withheld in full adds support to the government's position."  "In his opposition, [plaintiff] complained that, of those documents that were released, the 'vast majority [are] completely "redacted[.]"'"  "But [plaintiff] has not objected to any particular redaction, nor has he presented any quantum of evidence that the government withheld reasonably segregable materials."  "The Court concludes that the government has met its burden with regard to segregability."