Frankenberry v. FBI, No. 3:CV-08-1565, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3490 (M.D. Penn. Jan. 9, 2013) (Caputo, J.)

Date: 
Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Re: Request for records pertaining to Plaintiff's previous criminal trial and criminal proceedings in state court Disposition: Adopting in part and rejecting in part Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation; granting defendants' motion to summary judgment
  • Exemption 7(C): The court rejects the Magistrate Judge's recommendation requiring supplemental disclosure of information withheld pursuant Exemption 7(C). At issue is the defendants' ability to "make an actual determination as to whether these individuals are deceased or living." "Defendants could not verify the life/death status of the redacted names" because "identifying information such as a date of birth or social security number is necessary to make a match…and such information is not contained in the responsive documents." The court concludes "'the Government has made reasonable use of the information readily available to it, and [] there [does not] exist reasonable alternative methods that the Government failed to employ.'" The defendants have "adequately satisfied their obligation of demonstrating a privacy interest in the documents withheld" and "[p]laintiff has failed to establish a public benefit in the disclosure of the withheld individuals' identities."
  • Exemption 7(D): The court determines that "the exemption is being claimed throughout the documents for an individual that [the court] previously determined provided information under an express grant of confidentiality" and adopts the Magistrate Judge's recommendation.
  • Exemption 7(E): The court finds that "information related to expenditures made in the course of investigating Plaintiff may be withheld" under exemption (b)(7)(E) and adopts the Magistrate Judge's recommendation.
Topic: 
District Court
Exemption 7C
Exemption 7D
Exemption 7E
Updated August 6, 2014