Skip to main content

Sanders v. FBI, No. 20-3672, 2022 WL 888191 (D.D.C. Mar. 25, 2022) (Berman Jackson, J.)

Date

Sanders v. FBI, No. 20-3672, 2022 WL 888191 (D.D.C. Mar. 25, 2022) (Berman Jackson, J.)

Re:  Request for records concerning the FBI's relationship with a foreign law enforcement agency

Disposition:  Granting defendant's motion for summary judgment

  • Exemption 7, Threshold:  "The agency argues that any records pertaining to the FBI's alleged interactions with a foreign law enforcement agency in the context of a particular investigative matter would be part of a criminal or national security investigation, conducted pursuant to the FBI's law enforcement duties."  "Further, it maintains that 'records compiled for a law enforcement purpose may include internal agency materials relating to guidelines, techniques, sources, and procedures for law enforcement investigations and prosecutions, even when the materials have not been compiled in the course of a specific investigation.'"  "The Court finds that the FBI has made the threshold showing that the documents responsive to plaintiff's requests were compiled for law enforcement purposes."
     
  • Exemption 7(E), Glomar:  "The FBI's declarant avers:  'Confirming or denying the existence or non-existence of responsive records to [p]laintiff's request, . . . would reveal non-public FBI techniques by revealing coordination (or lack thereof) between a specific [foreign law enforcement agency ("FLA")] and the FBI in a particular matter.'"  Defendant further states that "[i]t would also disclose the types of information the FBI is able to obtain from the specific FLA and the types of cases it chooses to coordinate with the FLA."  As for the harm in acknowledging the existence or records, defendant argues that "[m]erely acknowledging the types of information shared between the FBI and any specific FLA partner would reveal the FBI's capabilities and vulnerabilities when it comes to coordination and information sharing with certain FLAs; thus providing criminals/criminal organizations under investigation, details concerning the scope of collection and information gathering capabilities and strengths of the FBI, as well as identify vulnerabilities or weaknesses of the FBI and/or FLA to exploit in these investigative areas/efforts."  The court finds that "[u]nderstanding how the FBI does or does not obtain information from foreign partners, in a specific investigation or more generally, would enable criminals to predict FBI investigative tactics and develop countermeasures to avoid detection[,]" posing a risk of circumvention of the law.  The court holds that "[t]he exemption was properly invoked."

    "The Court finds that plaintiff has not supplied any statements that constitute official acknowledgments of the existence of the records requested."  "For one, while the Department of Justice has plainly acknowledged the existence of some law enforcement operations and investigations with its foreign counterparts, the press releases that plaintiff cites do not reference 'the specific information sought by the plaintiff.'"  "Further, the Court finds that the FBI did not 'publicly and officially acknowledge' coordination with or the receipt of information from the specific foreign law enforcement agency at issue in the context of the investigative matter described in plaintiff's request."  "[In the Eastern District of Virginia case], all references to the name of the foreign law enforcement agency are redacted, . . . and the underlying sworn affidavit that the court cites is not publicly accessible."
Court Decision Topic(s)
District Court opinions
Exemption 7(E)
Exemption 7, Threshold
Glomar
Updated April 19, 2022