Kelly v. U. S. Census Bureau, No. 10-04507, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149671 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 20, 2014) (White, J.)

Kelly v. U. S. Census Bureau, No. 10-04507, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149671 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 20, 2014) (White, J.)

Re: Request for records concerning plaintiff's employment with the United States Census Bureau

Disposition: Granting defendant's motion for summary judgment

• Litigation Considerations, Adequacy of Search:  The court addresses defendant's action on multiple requests.  Regarding the first request at issue, the court finds that "the record demonstrates that the Census properly responded to [plaintiff's] request for documents."  Concerning plaintiff's arguments, "the Court finds sufficient evidence in the record to demonstrate there was no . . . misinterpretation" of plaintiff's request.  "[T]he Court finds no evidentiary support with respect to [plaintiff's] argument that Census responded in bad faith to his FOIA request."  The court finds similarly concerning plaintiff's second request, holding that "the Census determined which offices should receive the request and search for responsive documents."  The court notes that defendant "describe[d] the search and how it was calculated to uncover all documents responsive to [plaintiff's] request."  Additionally, "the Court finds that any possible deficiency in the Census's earlier response to the request for the same documents is moot as it was cured by the Census's subsequent search."  The court also finds that plaintiff's "presents no evidence to demonstrate why the Census's method was inadequate."  Regarding a third request at issue, "[t]he Court thus finds that even if [a letter submitted by plaintiff can be considered] a new request, it did not necessitate the Census to conduct a new search because the first search, for the same documents, was adequate."  The court explains that "[plaintiff] does not suggest new documents were generated after his request."
   
• Litigation Considerations, Mootness and Other Grounds for Dismissal:  Regarding a fourth request at issue, "the Court grants the Census's motion for summary judgment" because "[a]lthough [plaintiff] asserts that he received no response, the Census timely supplied [plaintiff] with a copy of all responsive documents."