👁 1
💬 0
📄 Extracted Text (690 words)
MARTIN G. WEINBERG, P.C.
ATTORNEYAT LAW
20 PARK PLAZA. SUITE 1001 EMAIL ADDRESSES:
BUTTON. MASSACHUSETTS 02116
NI=
PA;
NIIMANCV:
August 24, 2011
Office of Information Policy
U.S. Department of Justice, Suite 11050
1425 New York Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20530-0001
FOIPA Request No.: 1142669-002
Re: EPSTEIN, JEFFREY EDWARD
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT APPEAL
Director of Office of Information Policy,
This is a timely appeal pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6), concerning the U.S.
Federal Bureau of Investigation's ("F.B.I." or "Agency") denial of a request for records
within their control.
I am writing this letter on behalf of Jeffrey Edward Epstein. As noted in the
original FOIA request, dated June 28, 2011, Mr. Epstein seeks disclosure of any,
"records, documents, files, conununications, memoranda, orders, agreements
and/or instructions created from January 1, 2000 to June 28, 2011, that were
prepared, received, transmitted, collected and/or maintained by the Federal
Bureau of Investigation or any of its components or field offices [...)"
See, original FOIA request, page 2, paragraphs 1-3.
The Agency, by a letter dated August 8, 2011, refused to disclose any and all of
the requested material, asserting that the requested records are located in an investigative
file exempt from disclosure pursuant to 5 U.S.C. §552(b)(7)(A). In applying this
exemption the Agency has determined that the responsive records are law enforcement
records, relevant to a pending or prospective law enforcement proceeding and that the
release of the information contained in these records could reasonably be expected to
interfere with the enforcement proceedings. We assert a good faith basis and believe that
EFTA01104763
any ongoing FBI investigation ended either on or about June 30, 2008 or no later than
July of 2010, and therefore do not agree that the requested materials are exempt from
disclosure under 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(A). Accordingly, we hereby ask that the Director
reverse the denial of Mr. Epstein's FOIA request and waive all associated fees. We also
contest the single sentence summary that every requested record falls within the
enumerated exemption that the disclosure of [each) such record, in whole or in part, will
"interfere" with "a pending or prospective law enforcement proceeding".
It is by now well-established law, that a plaintiff in a FOIA case is entitled to an
index of the documents and/or portions of documents that have been withheld by the
defendant agency. Vaughn v. Rosen, 484 F.2d 820 (D.C. Cir. 1973), cert. denied 415
U.S. 977 (1974). Moreover, the description of the withheld material must be
"sufficiently specific to permit a reasoned judgment as to whether the material is actually
exempt under FOIA." Founding Church of Scientology v. Bell, 603 F2.d 945, 949 (D.C.
Dir. 1979). Accordingly, we further request that if any portions of the requested
documents are withheld, that the Director should describe the deleted material in detail
and specify the statutory justification applied in this instance. Finally, we request that
those portions of the documents which may indeed be properly exempted from disclosure
under 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(A) should be released pursuant to the Director's powers of
discretionary release under 36 C.F.R. § 200.11(b) and 7 C.F.R. § .17(b).
The Agency has erred in their denial of the requested material. The wholesale
application of exemption 5 U.S.C. § 552(bX7XA) is inappropriate in this instance.
Moreover, assuming, arguendo, that any portion of any document may be exempt from
disclosure, "any reasonable segregable portion of a record shall be provided to any person
requesting such record after deletion of the portions which are exempt...", 5 USC 552(b).
We request the application of the "segregable portions" clause of the Act.
In the event that this appeal is denied, the Agency is required to provide a written
response describing the reasons for denial, names and titles of each person responsible for
the denial, and the procedures required to invoke judicial assistance in this matter. 5
U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(ii), 7 C.F.R. § 1.8(d). If the appeal is denied or the Agency's response
is not forthcoming within 20 working days, my client reserves his right under FOIA to
seek judicial review, including the award of attorney's fees. 1 await your prompt reply.
Sincerely,
eivivit
Martin G.-Wein
EFTA01104764
ℹ️ Document Details
SHA-256
fe37e4067e08dbdbc51a7ace51155be52e1425d6f5705051d8a62f7481b34a77
Bates Number
EFTA01104763
Dataset
DataSet-9
Type
document
Pages
2
💬 Comments 0