New York Times Co. v. United States Secret Serv., No. 17-1885, 2018 WL 722420 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 5, 2018) (Crotty, J.)
Re: Request for billing and payment information concerning air transportation cost of protective details which accompanied 2016 Presidential candidates
Disposition: Granting defendant's motion for summary judgment; denying plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment; denying plaintiff's motion for attorney fees
- Exemptions 7(E) & 7(F): "The Court holds that the Service has sufficiently established the applicability of Exemptions 7(E) and 7(F)." "The Service has submitted declarations . . . illustrating, with sufficiently detailed explanations, how the disclosure of redacted information would enable adversaries to gather intelligence on the Service's protective means and methods and foresee the staffing of protective details on future flights." "Such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law, as required under Exemption 7(E); or, alternatively, could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual, as required under Exemption 7(F)." Specifically responding to plaintiff's objection concerning Exemption 7(F), the court finds that "the Service identifies, as 'any individual,' the protectees authorized to be protected by statute (18 U.S.C. § 3056) and Secret Service agents assigned to their protective details (hereinafter referred to as the Identified Group)." "The Court holds that the Identified Group is reasonably specific."
- Attorney Fees, Eligibility: The court holds that "[plaintiff] has not substantially prevailed because [plaintiff] has failed to obtain any relief[.]" "Accordingly, [plaintiff] cannot recover the fees and costs."