Stalcup v. Naval Special Warfare Command, No. 13-11966, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116978 (D. Mass. Aug. 27, 2015) (Young, J.)

Stalcup v. Naval Special Warfare Command, No. 13-11966, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116978 (D. Mass. Aug. 27, 2015) (Young, J.)

Re: Request for records concerning Navy Seal activity near Long Island, NY from July 1996 to August 1996

Disposition: Granting defendant's motion for summary judgment

• Procedural Requirements, Searching for Responsive Records:  "[T]he Court . . . rules that [defendant's] search in response to [plaintiff's] FOIA request was adequate."  The court finds that "[w]hile [plaintiff] is correct that many of the search terms used by individual commands are relevant only to the period following the crash [at issue in the request], he is wrong to leap to the conclusion that this means that NSWC did not search for and produce information related to their activities in the time leading up to the crash."  "The manual search of the command histories for the entire year of 1996 encompasses the relevant time period in its entirety."  "It would be unreasonable for the Court to deem the entire search inadequate based on an individual command's failure to employ search terms to find information that the manual search of that command's histories did not uncover."  "Accordingly, . . . the Court finds that the affidavit provided by NSWC is entitled to a presumption of good faith."  The court rejects plaintiff's counter-arguments "based on the insufficiency of the evidence offered by [plaintiff]."  "While [plaintiff] is right that certain records must be maintained, he has not done enough to convince the Court that the specific records existed in the first place."  "At its core, [plaintiff's] argument essentially boils down to the idea that there must be more information out there somewhere -- but this is no more than mere speculation."  "In the absence of 'positive indications of overlooked materials,' meaning specific documents that ought to exist but do not, . . . this argument does not cast sufficient doubt on the record to overcome the presumption that [defendant's] affidavit was offered in good faith."
   
• Litigation Considerations, In Camera Inspection:  "[T]he Court declines to conduct in camera review."  The court explains that "[it] has already ruled that [defendant's] affidavit is adequately detailed and was filed in good faith, [which] undercut[s] [plaintiff's] proffered basis for in camera review."