Case Detail
Case Title | BLIXSETH v. UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
District | District of Columbia | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
City | Washington, DC | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Case Number | 1:2019cv01292 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Date Filed | 2019-05-03 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Date Closed | 2020-01-14 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Judge | Judge James E. Boasberg | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plaintiff | TIMOTHY BLIXSETH | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Case Description | Seth Blexseth submitted a FOIA request for records related to his name, a specific aircraft tail number, or Yellowstone Aviation & Marine. The agency acknowledged receipt of the request and told Blixseth that he would need to commit to paying $300 for the cost of processing his request or narrow its scope. The agency ultimately processed Blixseth's request and disclosed 357 pages. Blixseth filed an administrative appeal of the response, indicating that the search was inadequate because his airplane had been intercepted by ICE on three occasions. After a further search, the agency disclosed another 48 pages. Still dissatisfied. Blixseth filed suit. Complaint issues: Adequacy - Search, Litigation - Attorney's fees | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Defendant | UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Defendant | US IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Documents | Docket Complaint Complaint attachment 1 Complaint attachment 2 Complaint attachment 3 Complaint attachment 4 Complaint attachment 5 Complaint attachment 6 Complaint attachment 7 Complaint attachment 8 Complaint attachment 9 Complaint attachment 10 Complaint attachment 11 Complaint attachment 12 Complaint attachment 13 Complaint attachment 14 Complaint attachment 15 Complaint attachment 16 Complaint attachment 17 Complaint attachment 18 Complaint attachment 19 Complaint attachment 20 Complaint attachment 21 Complaint attachment 22 Opinion/Order [23] FOIA Project Annotation: Judge James Boasberg has ruled that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement conducted an adequate search for records concerning why the agency had searched Timothy Blixseth's private plane three times and properly withheld records under Exemption 6 (invasion of privacy), Exemption 7(C) (invasion of privacy concerning law enforcement records), and Exemption 7(E) (investigative methods and techniques). In response to Blixseth's two requests, the agency located and provided 357 pages responsive to his second request. After an administrative appeal, the agency provided 48 pages responsive to the first request, withholding six pages entirely, and redacting 42 pages. After Blixseth filed suit, the agency provided more information from those 48 pages. Blixseth asked Boasberg to review the pages in camera, which he did. After reviewing the agency's affidavits, Boasberg indicated that "there is no genuine issue of material fact as to the adequacy of ICE's searches." Blixseth argued that since the searches of his planes had taken place, there must be more records. But the ICE explained that the searches had been conducted by the Marine Operations Center, which is part of U.S. Customs and Border Protection rather than ICE. As a consequence, Boasberg noted that "documents controlled by an agency other than the one processing the request do not constitute part of the defendant agency's FOIA obligation. As a result, Plaintiff's argument that ICE was required to search the records of different DHS agencies falls short." After reviewing the documents in camera, Boasberg agreed with the agency that the records, which were compiled by Homeland Security Investigations, qualified as law enforcement records." He noted "because all the documents constitute records of HIS's investigation into the safety of an expedited flight clearance for various aircraft, businesses, and persons, they are law-enforcement records" Boasberg found the withheld records contained personally identifying information and that Blixseth had provided no evidence of any public interest that might outweigh the privacy interest. As to the redactions made under Exemption 7(E), Boasberg noted that "the redacted material includes things like record identification numbers, databases used for investigation, code numbers (but not what they stand for), and questions and answers to certain inquiries undertaken as part of an HSI investigation. The Court therefore credits ICE's assertion that this information 'is not readily known by the public.'"
Issues: Adequacy - Search | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
User-contributed Documents | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Docket Events (Hide) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|