Judicial Watch, Inc. v. DHS, No. 12-2014, 2014 WL 3796890 (D.D.C. July, 24, 2014) (Rothstein, J.)

Judicial Watch, Inc. v. DHS, No. 12-2014, 2014 WL 3796890 (D.D.C. July, 24, 2014) (Rothstein, J.)

Re: Request for records concerning September 11th hijacker, Mohamed Atta

Disposition: Granting defendant's motion for summary judgment; denying plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment

• Litigation Considerations, Adequacy of Search:  The court holds that defendant's declaration "is sufficient on its own to establish that the search was adequate, as it is reasonably detailed, states the search terms and type of search performed, and avers that all potentially responsive files were located and searched."  The court also rejects plaintiff's argument that "the failure of DHS to identify and produce certain documents pertaining to Atta that had previously been made public by the 9–11 Commission" renders defendant's search inadequate.  The court finds that "the record does not demonstrate that the documents were in the custody and control of USCIS at the time of the FOIA request" and "even if USCIS had the documents in its possession, its failure to produce them as part of Judicial Watch's FOIA request does not alone render the search inadequate."
   
• Exemption 7(A):  The court holds that "[i]n light of the deference owed to the agency, . . . the Court concludes that DHS properly withheld the documents."  The court finds that defendant's declaration "demonstrates that the information in question is part of an ongoing investigation into the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, which may lead to future law enforcement proceedings, and that the FBI determined that disclosure of any of the records in question in the midst of the ongoing investigation is reasonably expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings."  The court also finds that "the fact that Atta is dead, as Judicial Watch repeatedly points out, does not render the exemption irrelevant, because the investigation into the 9–11 attacks is still ongoing."
   
• Litigation Considerations, Vaughn Index / Declaration:  The court holds that "[t]he Vaughn Index is sufficient."  The court explains that "[t]his Circuit has held that '[b]ecause generic determinations are permitted, the government need not justify its withholdings document-by-document; it may instead do so category-of-document by category-of-document.'"  "[B]ecause courts owe 'substantial weight to ... agency explanations in the national security context,' . . . , and DHS claims that 'providing a detailed description of the material within these specific DHS records concerning Mohamed Atta would undermine the very interests that the FBI seeks to protect under Exemption 7(A),' . . . , DHS's grouping of the withheld documents into four general categories satisfies the requirement under 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(A)."