The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hurd, District Judge.
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
On September 18, 2000, plaintiff Matthias Doolittle
("Doolittle") commenced the instant action against defendants
U.S. Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Agency ("DEA"), and
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Information and
Privacy*fn1 ("OIP") (collectively, the "defendants") pursuant
to the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 ("FOIA"),
seeking access to certain records concerning himself maintained
Defendants now move for summary judgment pursuant to Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 56, on the grounds that plaintiff has
received all of the requested information to which he is
entitled under the FOIA. Plaintiff opposes.
This action arises out of Doolittle's request for DEA
records*fn2 concerning his arrest on drug charges in November
1996. The following are the facts as stated in the light most
favorable to the non-moving plaintiff.
Furthermore, on January 6, 2000, DEA indicated that Doolittle
was mentioned in several "related" files, and that he would have
to pay a search fee to have these files processed. By letter
dated May 29, 2000, Doolittle agreed to pay this search fee.
Through an apparent error by DEA, it appears that this letter
was mishandled and his request was not acted upon until after
the commencement of this litigation.
Doolittle was dissatisfied with DEA's response to his FOIA
request. On February 10, 2000, he appealed DEA's response to the
OIP. Doolittle objected to DEA's basis for withholding the
records which were not provided to him, and also asserted that
DEA had failed to respond to his request for records relating to
a second search of his residence. His appeal was denied on
August 23, 2000. Plaintiff commenced the instant action on
September 18, 2000.
Subsequent to the commencement of this action, DEA acted upon
Doolittle's letter of May 29, 2000. On February 9, 2001,
portions of two pages of DEA records were released to plaintiff.
Five pages were withheld in their entirety. DEA invoked FOIA
exemptions (b)(2), (b)(3), (b)(7)(C), (b)(7)(D), and Privacy Act
exemption (j)(2) in support of its decision to withhold these
records. With regard to Doolittle's claim that DEA had failed to
release records relating to a second search of his residence,
DEA Paralegal Specialist Leila I. Wassom ("Wassom") stated:
Regarding the plaintiffs allegation that DEA failed
to provide documents to the plaintiff concerning an
alleged "second . . . search of the plaintiffs
residence . . ." [sic] The plaintiff does not provide
a date on which the alleged search took place. DEA
has released all non-exempt documents pursuant to the
plaintiff's FOIA/PA request.
(Wassom Supp. Decl. at 2.)
Doolittle submitted a response to Wassom's supplemental
affidavit ("Pl. Response"). Doolittle attached a portion of the
minutes of his sentencing hearing to this response as Exhibit 1.
During the sentencing hearing, Doolittle's attorney stated that
the alleged second search occurred "approximately a day later,
or maybe even later that same day, some twelve hours ...