Mount v. Nielsen, No. 16-2532, 2018 WL 707485 (D.D.C. Feb. 5, 2018) (Cooper, J.)
Re: Request for records concerning "allegation that . . . [a] Supervisory Special Agent . . . lost his official credentials to a prostitute and the credentials had to be retrieved by local police"
Disposition: Granting defendant's motion for summary judgment; denying plaintiff's motion for summary judgment
- Exemption 7, Threshold: The court holds that "any OIG investigation of a Special Agent losing his credentials to a prostitute would be related to the enforcement of federal laws and connected to OIG's law enforcement duties" and, therefore, if any records existed, they would "be compiled for law enforcement purposes."
- Exemption 7(C), Glomar: The court holds that "[t]he Department's Glomar response is . . . proper." The court finds that "'"[t]here can be no clearer example of an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy than to release to the public that another individual was the subject of [a law enforcement] investigation."'" "That is precisely the harm that would follow from the Department's confirmation of any records responsive to [plaintiff's] request." The court also finds that "the public interest is not strong enough to justify the privacy invasion."