Skip to main content

Petrucelli v. DOJ, No. 11-1780, 2016 WL 354872 (D.D.C. Jan. 28, 2016) (Walton, J.)


Petrucelli v. DOJ, No. 11-1780, 2016 WL 354872 (D.D.C. Jan. 28, 2016) (Walton, J.)

Re: Request for records concerning plaintiff's criminal prosecution

Disposition: Granting defendant's motion for summary judgment

  • Exemption 7(C):  The court holds that "EOUSA has . . . adequately demonstrated the propriety of its reliance on FOIA Exemption 7(C)."  The court finds that "the individuals identified in the correspondence have a legitimate privacy interest, and neither the EOUSA nor the plaintiff identifies a public interest of any kind, let alone a public interest of such magnitude that it outweighs the individuals’ privacy interest."  The court relates that "EOUSA withholds 'the names of DOJ employees who were responsible for investigating and prosecuting the plaintiff,' . . . 'the names and phone numbers for local and state law enforcement employees[,]'" and "'the names [of] and identifying information concerning third parties in contact with the DOJ or other law enforcement agencies for investigative purposes.'"
  • Litigation Considerations, "Reasonably Segregable" Requirements:  "On review of all of the defendant’s supporting declarations and the EOUSA’s Vaughn Index, the Court concludes that the defendant has adequately specified 'which portions of the document[s] are disclosable and which are ... exempt.'"
Court Decision Topic(s)
District Court opinions
Exemption 7(C)
Litigation Considerations, “Reasonably Segregable” Requirements
Updated January 13, 2022