Garza v. USMS, No. 18-5311, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 1917 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 22, 2020) (per curiam)

Garza v. USMS, No. 18-5311, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 1917 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 22, 2020) (per curiam)

Re:  Request for records concerning requester's Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs Information System number

Disposition:  Granting government's motion for summary affirmance of district court's grant of government's motion for summary judgment

• Litigation Considerations, Adequacy of Search:  The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit holds that "[t]he district court correctly determined that the searches by the Federal Bureau of Investigation . . . and the U.S. Marshals Service . . . in response to [the requester's] [FOIA] requests were adequate."  "[The requester] also appears to challenge the adequacy of the search conducted by the Drug Enforcement Administration . . ., but the record does not reflect that he filed a FOIA request with the DEA, which reviewed documents referred to it by the FBI."
   
• Exemption 7(C):  The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit holds that "[the government] properly invoked FOIA Exemption 7(C) to withhold personally identifiable information of individuals involved with [the requester's] criminal investigation and prosecution and of third parties mentioned in the records responsive to [the requester's] requests."  "[The requester] has not demonstrated any public interest in disclosure that would outweigh these privacy interests."
   
• Exemption 7(D):  The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit holds that "the FBI and the DEA properly invoked FOIA Exemption 7(D) to withhold information that would disclose the identity of, and information provided by, a confidential source."  "The FBI averred that some of the sources mentioned in responsive records were provided express assurances of confidentiality, and both agencies have demonstrated that confidentiality was implied as to the other sources in light of the nature of the underlying crimes."
   
• Exemption 7(E):  The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit holds that "the FBI and the DEA properly invoked FOIA Exemption 7(E) to withhold information regarding the effectiveness of investigative techniques and internal filing codes, respectively."  The court finds that "[t]he agencies have adequately demonstrated that the release of this information 'might increase the risk that a law will be violated or that past violators will escape legal consequences.'"  Additionally, the court finds that "[the requester] has not challenged the FBI's invocation of Exemption 7(E) with respect to a non-public telephone and secure email addresses, and he has therefore forfeited any challenge to that aspect of the district court's decision."
   
• Exemption 7(F):  The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit holds that "[it] need not evaluate the merits of the DEA's invocation of Exemption 7(F), because the material withheld under that exemption overlapped with the material withheld under other valid exemptions."
   
• Litigation Considerations, "Reasonably Segregable" Requirements:  The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit holds that "[t]he agencies have demonstrated that all reasonably segregable information was disclosed to [the requester]."  The court finds that "[t]he agencies have all filed declarations that provide the court with an adequate basis to make a segregability finding."  "[The requester] has not provided evidence to rebut the presumption that the agencies properly segregated non-exempt information."
   
• Litigation Considerations, In Camera Inspection:  The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit holds that "the district court did not abuse its discretion by not conducting an in camera review of the records to determine whether all reasonably segregable information had been released."