McWatters v. ATF, No. 20-1092, 2022 WL 990689 (D.D.C. Mar. 31, 2022) (Chutkan, J.)

McWatters v. ATF, No. 20-1092, 2022 WL 990689 (D.D.C. Mar. 31, 2022) (Chutkan, J.)

Re:  Request for audio recording of individuals perishing in a fire

Disposition:  Granting in part and denying in part defendant's motion for summary judgment; denying plaintiff's motion for summary judgment

• Exemption 7(C):  "Family members of decedents have a right to personal privacy with respect to images and audio of their close relative's final moments."  "[Plaintiff] responds by offering the Declaration of an audio engineer who states that it would be impossible to determine 'the actual individual personal identities of specific persons from the sounds of human suffering that one would expect to be captured on this type of audio recording.'"  "But ATF has met the standard of a 'mere possibility' of harm; it has identified some specific voices on the recordings, and the identifies of those who perished in the fire are known."  "The court is unaware of any authority requiring ATF to individually identify each victim from their last moments, the court does not find that ATF was required to undergo such an analysis."  "Thus, ATF has adduced legitimate privacy interests that would be invaded by the release of the recording."  "[Plaintiff] represents that the public interest lies in 'encourag[ing] the ATF, (and other federal agencies) to adopt and improve fire safety laws and measures to, in order to prevent future catastrophic fire incidents, save lives.'"  "While [plaintiff] invokes ATF in his declaration, he makes no connection between the recording's contents and ATF's performance of its duties; i.e., its investigation after the Station nightclub fire."  "The court thus turns to the balancing test."  "Here, the families of the many victims heard on the recording, including members of Great White and the attendee who made the recording, have a significant privacy interest in nondisclosure."  "By contrast, [plaintiff] has failed to state a public interest."  "Without any such interest, the court 'need not linger over the balance; something, even a modest privacy interest, outweighs nothing every time.'"
   
• Litigation Considerations, "Reasonably Segregable" Requirements:  "[Plaintiff] identified three portions of the recording: before, during, and after the start of the fire."  "ATF addresses specifically why the before and during portions of the recording should be exempt."  "But no information is provided as to segregation efforts for the last 8 minutes of the recording, when no human voices are audible, or if that portion of the recording is itself exempt under Exemption 7(C)."  "Because ATF provided at least some information as to segregability, the court will order ATF to provide additional information as to segregability and whether the final 8 minutes of the recording might also be exempt, and to file a renewed motion for summary judgment."