SHAPIRO v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Filing
67
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER that the government shall submit an unredacted copy of "Serial 91" to the Court on or before 5:00 p.m. on July 15, 2019 for its in camera review. Signed by Judge Paul L. Friedman on July 10, 2019. (MA)
Case 1:13-cv-00729-PLF Document 67 Filed 07/10/19 Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________
)
RYAN NOAH SHAPIRO,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
)
)
Defendant.
)
__________________________________________)
Civil Action No. 13-0729 (PLF)
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the government’s renewed motion for summary
judgment (“Gov. Mot.”) [Dkt. No. 53] and Mr. Shapiro’s renewed cross-motion for summary
judgment (“Pl. Cross-Mot.”) [Dkt. No. 55]. The parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment
dispute the withholdings made by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) under the
Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552, as to one remaining record, known as
“Serial 91.”
The parties continue to dispute the propriety of five redactions contained on one
page of Serial 91. The government has claimed that three different withholdings are warranted
under Exemption 7(E) to protect the identity of an FBI unit. See Gov. Mot. at 12. In addition,
the government has claimed that two separate withholdings are warranted under both
Exemptions 7(E) and 3 to protect the name of a database. See id. Mr. Shapiro makes a number
of arguments challenging the propriety of the redactions under both Exemptions and requests
that the Court view Serial 91 in camera, arguing that it is not possible to determine on the basis
Case 1:13-cv-00729-PLF Document 67 Filed 07/10/19 Page 2 of 2
of the government’s submitted declarations whether the content of the redactions qualifies for
withholding under Exemption 7(E). See Pl. Cross-Mot. at 18.
The Court concludes that in camera inspection is appropriate in this case and
would facilitate a prompt resolution of the pending motions. Serial 91 is a two-page document,
so in camera review will not unduly burden the Court. See Quinon v. F.B.I., 86 F.3d 1222, 1228
(D.C. Cir. 1996). The parties have had an opportunity to explain their positions on the propriety
of the claimed exemptions, and the government has submitted two separate declarations to
explain the FBI’s justifications for its withholdings. The parties dispute the propriety of the
FOIA exemptions based on the content of the redactions, not their interpretation of the redacted
information. See id. at 1228. Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED that the government shall submit an unredacted copy of “Serial 91” to
the Court on or before 5:00 p.m. on July 15, 2019 for its in camera review.
SO ORDERED.
______________________
PAUL L. FRIEDMAN
United States District Judge
DATE: July 10, 2019
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?