Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Serv., 802 F. App'x 309 (9th Cir. 2020) (per curiam)

Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Serv., 802 F. App'x 309 (9th Cir. 2020) (per curiam)

Re:  Request for certain data maintained in Law Enforcement Management Information System database which tracks animal species being imported and exported

Disposition:  Vacating district court's grant of requester's motion for summary judgment; remanding case to district court

• Exemption 4:  The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit "vacate[s] the judgment as it applies to [the intervenor who intervened after judgment was entered "to protect the confidentiality of its member-companies' information regarding the importation and exportation of wildlife"] and remand[s] for further proceedings."  The court explains that "[t]he district court did not have the benefit of [Food Marketing Institute v. Argus Leader Media] in deciding whether the disputed information is 'confidential,' and [the court] decline[s] to apply the new legal standard in the first instance."  "Similarly, because the district court assumed without deciding that the information was 'commercial information,' [the court] decline[s] to resolve that issue."  "Remand is particularly appropriate here because the factual record may benefit from further development as to both of Food Marketing's prongs."  "As to the first prong, [the intervenor's] members' declarations imply that they 'customarily and actually' treat the commercial information as private, though they did not say how."  "Likewise, the declarations do not address whether the companies designated the information as 'confidential' when they submitted the information to the Service, which may also be relevant."