Skip to main content

Estevez v. USAO, No. 15-02951, 2018 WL 500967 (S.D. Cal. Jan. 22, 2018) (Battaglia, J.)

Date

Estevez v. USAO, No. 15-02951, 2018 WL 500967 (S.D. Cal. Jan. 22, 2018) (Battaglia, J.)

Re:  Request for records concerning plaintiff

Disposition:  Granting defendants' motion for summary judgment; denying plaintiff's motion for summary judgment

  • Litigation Considerations, Adequacy of Search:  "[T]he Court concludes that [defendants] have satisfied their first burden and demonstrated that they conducted adequate and reasonable searches[.]"  "[T]he Court finds that each declaration produced by [defendants] adequately details the processes and procedures by which each agency undertook the search for records responsive to [plaintiff's] requests."  "Additionally, each declaration describes in detail the databases that were searched and the search terms used."  In response to plaintiff's arguments, "the Court reiterates that a search under FOIA is based off of a standard of adequacy, not perfection."
     
  • Exemption 7, Threshold:  "[T]he Court finds that [BOP's] declaration establishes that the BOP's function and its purpose in compiling the documents at issue fall within a cognizable law enforcement mandate."  The court relates that "BOP has a clear law enforcement mandate as the BOP's principal function is the housing of pretrial or presentence inmates pending criminal proceedings along with the execution of sentences in criminal cases."  The court finds similarly regarding USMS and explains that "the protection of the federal judiciary is the responsibility of the USMS, including being authorized to provide courtroom security for the federal judiciary."
     
  • Exemption 7(C):  Regarding BOP's withholdings, the court finds that "disclosing inmate names and register numbers, medical information of an inmate involved in an altercation with [plaintiff], and employee names and telephone numbers risks subjecting these individuals to significant invasions of personal privacy."  "This invasion of privacy is not, in this case, outweighed by any public interest alleged by [plaintiff]."  "[Plaintiff's] arguments are simply statements that repeat the law with no factual allegations or evidence to support his theories."  Regarding USMS's withholdings, the court finds similarly on the same type of withheld information.
Court Decision Topic(s)
District Court opinions
Exemption 7(C)
Exemption 7, Threshold
Litigation Considerations, Adequacy of Search
Updated December 2, 2021