Case Detail

FOIA Project Annotation: Judge Rosemary Collyer has ruled that the CIA properly withheld a one-page Counterintelligence and Force Protection Check worksheet used by the agency in performing background checks. Majed Subh requested information from the Army about why he had not been hired as a linguist. Part of the responsive documents included the background check worksheet, which was referred to the FBI and the CIA. The FBI indicated the worksheet could be disclosed in full, but the CIA insisted in redacting a portion of it. Subh then sued. The CIA claimed the information was protected under Exemption 3 (other statutes) by the National Security Act's protection for sources and methods, and by the CIA Act's restriction against disclosure of organizational and functional information about the CIA. The CIA argued that "the agency's 'covert intelligence interest in a specific individual represents an intelligence method that is core to the CIA's clandestine collection function.' If the CIA were not allowed 'to preserve the clandestine nature of its intelligence methods, [its] ability to perform its core function would be compromised.'" Collyer noted that "the CIA's response is essentially a Glomar response." She added that "the CIA's declarant establishes that any further response to Plaintiff's FOIA request would reveal agency sources or methods. If the CIA were to state that it had no information pertaining to Plaintiff, it would indicate either that it has no interest in him or is incapable of acquiring information about him." She observed that "although the release of the information Plaintiff requests may appear to pertain only to his application for employment, it may have greater significance. . .The CIA establishes that any further response to Plaintiff's FOIA request would result in disclosure of whether it has an intelligence interest in Plaintiff, which, in light of the CIA's covert intelligence responsibilities, would amount to the disclosure of an intelligence method. The CIA's response in this case is appropriate."
Issues: Exemption 3 - Statutory prohibition of disclosure

Date Filed	Doc #	Docket Text
2010-05-05	1	COMPLAINT against CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY (Filing fee $ 0.00) filed by MAJED SUBH. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(rdj) (Entered: 05/05/2010)
2010-05-05		SUMMONS (3) Issued as to CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (rdj) (Entered: 05/05/2010)
2010-05-05	2	MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by MAJED SUBH (rdj) (Entered: 05/05/2010)
2010-05-05		FIAT ORDER granting 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis "Leave to file without Prepayment of Cost GRANTED". Signed by Judge Ellen S. Huvelle on May 4, 2010. (rdj) (Entered: 05/05/2010)
2010-05-20	3	SUMMONS Returned Executed as to the US Attorney served on 5/19/2010, answer due 6/18/2010., RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed on Attorney General. Date of Service Upon Attorney General 5/19/2010. (rdj) (Entered: 05/21/2010)
2010-05-20	4	Summons Returned Unexecuted as to CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY. (rdj) (Entered: 05/21/2010)
Hide Docket Events