Jud. Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Just., 282 F. Supp. 3d 242 (2017). · Go Syfert
Search
Jud. Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Just., 282 F. Supp. 3d 242 (2017). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
8 citation events (8 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Justice (cadc, 2019-06-25)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Justice
D.C. Cir. · 2019 · signal: see · confidence high
See Judicial Watch, Inc. v. DOJ , 282 F. Supp. 3d 242 (D.D.C. 2017).
cited Cited "see" Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice
D.D.C. · 2019 · signal: see · confidence high
See Judicial Watch, Inc. v. DOJ, 282 F. Supp. 3d 242 (D.D.C. 2017).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
JUDICIAL WATCH, INC.
v.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Oct 20, 2017.
282 F. Supp. 3d 242
*245Lauren M. Burke, Paul J. Orfanedes, Judicial Watch, Inc., Washington, DC, for Plaintiff., John Cuong Truong, U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia, Michael Hendry Baer, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Defendant., Unhappy with FBI's decision to withhold certain records, Judicial Watch has sued. The government now moves for summary judgment in its favor, arguing that it has met its FOIA obligations. Judicial Watch has also made a cross-motion for summary judgment in its favor. Upon review of the entire record, the Court agrees with the government; the Court will grant its motion and deny Judicial Watch's cross-motion., Rod Blagojevich was criminally charged with multiple corruption-related crimes in 2008 after a federal investigation into his activities. Decl. of Debra Riggs Bonamici (Bonamici Decl.) [Dkt. 13-3] ¶¶ 5-6. After two trials, Mr. Blagojevich was convicted and appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. The Seventh Circuit ultimately affirmed his conviction, see United States v. Blagojevich , 854 F.3d 918 (7th Cir. 2017), and denied rehearing en banc , see Order, Blagojevich , No. 16-3254, ECF No. 53 (7th Cir. June 5, 2017). The parties briefed the instant motions while Mr. Blagojevich was continuing his appeal; the public record indicates that, at the time of this Memorandum Opinion's writing, the Supreme Court had most recently granted Mr. Blagojevich an extension of time to file a writ of certiorari to November 11, 2017. See Notice, Blagojevich , No. 16-3254, ECF No. 56 (7th Cir. August 4, 2017)., The FBI, a constituent entity of the Department of Justice, acknowledged receipt of the FOIA Request on May 23, 2012, and began searching for responsive records. Hardy Decl. ¶ 6. FBI RIDS employees searched FBI's Central Records System (CRS), a centralized records system encompassing the entire FBI organization, using the system's Automated Case Support (ACS), an electronic case management system. Id. ¶¶ 16-18; 22. RIDS searched ACS using a phonetic breakdown of the name \Rod Blagojevich\" and then used further keyword searches within those records using the names of the individuals named in the FOIA request.
Section 552(a)(4)(B) of the U.S. Code grants subject matter jurisdiction over all actions brought under FOIA  |  After filing a series of administrative appeals with DOJ

C. Segregability

The only remaining question is whether DOJ adequately assessed whether any non-exempt portions of the withheld FD-302s are segregable from exempt information. While an agency may properly withhold records or parts of records under FOIA exemptions, it must release "any reasonably segregable portions" of responsive records that do not contain exempted information. Schoenman v. FBI , 575 F.Supp.2d 136, 155 (D.D.C. 2008) ; 5 U.S.C. § 552(b). An agency bears the burden of demonstrating that all reasonably segregable portions of a record have been disclosed, and may do so by "offering an affidavit with reasonably detailed descriptions of the withheld portions of the documents and alleging facts sufficient to establish an exemption." Pac. Fisheries, Inc. v. United States , 539 F.3d 1143, 1148 (9th Cir. 2008).

DOJ asserts that it made "every effort" to "provide plaintiff with all material in the public domain and with all reasonably segregable, non-exempt information." Hardy Decl. ¶ 25. "Agencies are entitled to a presumption that they complied with the obligation to disclose reasonably segregable material." Sussman v. U.S. Marshals Serv. , 494 F.3d 1106, 1117 (D.C. Cir. 2007).

In this instance, the Court concludes that DOJ has met its burden to show no segregable information was inappropriately withheld. The only records withheld were three FD-302s, interview memos prepared by FBI investigators when speaking to potential witnesses. Exemption 7(A) is meant to apply broadly to an agency's "evidence and strategies, or the nature, scope, and focus of investigations," which can mean more than just simply the information contained therein. Maydak , 218 F.3d at 762. No evidence casts doubt on DOJ's sworn statement, and the Court finds that it has satisfied its obligation to release all segregable factual information. Accordingly, the Court finds that DOJ has met its burden.

CONCLUSION

For reasons stated above, the Court will grant DOJ's Motion for Summary Judgment [Dkt. 13], and will deny Judicial Watch's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment [Dkt. 16]. Judgment will be entered in favor of DOJ. A memorializing order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.