Gun Owners of Am., Inc. v. Fed. Bureau of Investigation

• Decision Date: 23 March 2022
• Docket Number: Civil Action No. 21-1601 (JDB)
• Citation: 594 F.Supp.3d 37
• Parties: GUN OWNERS OF AMERICA, INC., et al., Plaintiffs, v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, Defendant.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of Columbia

594 F.Supp.3d 37

GUN OWNERS OF AMERICA, INC., et al., Plaintiffs,

v.FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, Defendant.

Civil Action No. 21-1601 (JDB)

United States District Court, District of Columbia.

Signed March 23, 2022

Robert Jeffrey Olson, William J. Olson, PC, Vienna, VA, for Plaintiffs.

Dedra Seibel Curteman, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

JOHN D. BATES, United States District Judge

Plaintiffs seek to compel the Federal Bureau of Investigation to comply with four requests for records under the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"). The FBI denied three of the requests on the ground that they failed to reasonably describe the documents sought, and it now moves to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint with respect to those three requests for the same reason. The Court will grant in part and deny in part the FBI's motion.

Background

Gun Owners of America, Inc. and Gun Owners Foundation are Virginia non-profit organizations. Compl. [ECF No. 1] ¶¶ 3–4. Gun Owners of America "seeks to promote social welfare through informing and educating the public on and conducting activities in defense of the Second Amendment and the right to keep and bear arms," id. ¶ 3, while Gun Owners Foundation is "a nonprofit legal defense and educational foundation .... supported by gun owners across the country," id. ¶ 4. On March 15, 2021, the two organizations jointly filed four FOIA requests with the FBI, seeking records related to Virginia's procedures for conducting background checks prior to purchasing a firearm. Id. ¶ 7; see also Compl. Ex. A [ECF No. 1-1]. Specifically, plaintiffs requested:

• Request 1 – "records of all communications between the FBI and the Governor of Virginia, the Office of the Governor of Virginia, the Lieutenant Governor of Virginia, the Office of the Lieutenant Governor of Virginia, the Attorney General of Virginia, the Virginia Office of the Attorney General, and agents and employees of the same that occurred between January 11, 2014 until the date you begin to process this request";

• Request 2 – "records of all communications between the FBI and the Virginia Department of State Police involving the so-called ‘voluntary background check’ established by Va. Code Section 54.1-4201.2, or a so-called ‘special permit for voluntary background check’ or ‘firearms-related permit’ to be established by the executive branch of government in Virginia, that occurred between July 1, 2015 until the date you begin to process this request";

• Request 3 – "records related to whether Virginia's voluntary background check system and its implementation complies with 28 C.F.R. Section 25.6";

• Request 4 – "copies of the last four National Instant Criminal Background Check System audits conducted by the FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services Division with respect to the Commonwealth of Virginia."

Compl. Ex. A at 1–2 (footnote omitted).¹

The FBI acknowledged Request 4 and queued it for processing, Compl. Ex. B [ECF No. 1-2] at 2–3,² but it denied Requests 1, 2, and 3 on March 24, 2021, Compl. ¶¶ 8–11; Compl. Ex. B at 4–8. According to the FBI, Request 1 is "overly broad and ... does not provide enough detail to enable personnel to locate records ‘with a reasonable amount of effort,’ " Compl. Ex. B at 4; Request 2 "does not contain enough descriptive information to permit a search of [the FBI's] records," id. at 6; and Request 3 "do[es] not comply with the FOIA" because "[t]he FOIA does not require federal agencies to answer inquiries, create records, conduct research, or draw conclusions concerning queried data," id. at 8.

Plaintiffs administratively appealed this decision on April 9, 2021, Compl. ¶ 12; Compl. Ex. C [ECF No. 1-3], but they did not receive a decision on their appeal within the twenty days required by statute, Compl. ¶¶ 15, 17; see 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(A)(ii). Nor has the FBI issued a decision regarding compliance with Request 4, also in violation of a twenty-day deadline. Compl. ¶ 16; see 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(A)(i). Accordingly, plaintiffs brought the instant suit pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B) on June 11, 2021, alleging that the FBI is improperly withholding agency records and asking the Court to order the agency to search for and produce "any and all non-exempt records responsive to Plaintiffs’ FOIA request." Compl. at 5.

The FBI then moved to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint in part. See Mem. of P. & A. in Supp. of Def.’s Partial Mot. to Dismiss [ECF No. 5] ("Def.’s Mot."). The FBI contends that its initial denials of Requests 1, 2, and 3 were proper: the requests "fail to reasonably describe the records they seek or ... impose unreasonable burdens on the FBI." Id. at 4. And since plaintiffs did not "[p]resent[ ] a legally proper FOIA request," the FBI argues, they have failed to state a claim under FOIA. Id. Plaintiffs, naturally, oppose this motion, maintaining that their requests are sufficiently specific and satisfy FOIA's reasonable-description requirement. See generally Pls.’ Resp. to Def.’s Mot. [ECF No. 6] ("Pls.’ Opp'n"). The motion is now fully briefed and ripe for decision.

Legal Standard

To survive a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain " ‘a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief,’ in order to ‘give the defendant fair notice of what the ... claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.’ " Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007) (alteration in original) (quoting Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 47, 78 S.Ct. 99, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957) ). The "complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’ " Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955 ); accord Atherton v. D.C. Off. of Mayor, 567 F.3d 672, 681 (D.C. Cir. 2009). In deciding a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, the court must "take as true all well-pled factual allegations within [the plaintiff's] complaint" while also "disregard[ing] any legal conclusions, legal contentions couched as factual allegations, and unsupported factual allegations within the complaint." Gulf Coast Mar. Supply, Inc. v. United States, 867 F.3d 123, 128 (D.C. Cir. 2017). A Rule 12(b)(6) motion "must be decided only on the basis of the facts alleged in the complaint, any documents either attached to or incorporated in the complaint, and matters of which the court may take judicial notice." Galvin v. Del Toro, Civ. A. No. 21-1813 (JDB), 586 F.Supp.3d 1, 8 (D.D.C. Feb. 18, 2022) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

The Freedom of Information Act mandates that, upon request, federal agencies "shall make ... records promptly available to any person" so long as the request "(i) reasonably describes such records and (ii) is made in accordance with published rules stating the time, place, fees (if any), and procedures to be followed." 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(3)(A). Courts in this District "ha[ve] jurisdiction to enjoin the agency from withholding agency records and to order the production of any agency records improperly withheld from the complainant." Id. § 552(a)(4)(B). Thus, "[j]urisdiction under FOIA requires ‘a showing that an agency has (1) improperly; (2) withheld; (3) agency records.’ " Competitive Enter. Inst. v. Off. of Sci. & Tech. Pol'y, 827 F.3d 145, 147 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (some internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Kissinger v. Reps. Comm. for Freedom of Press, 445 U.S. 136, 150, 100 S.Ct. 960, 63 L.Ed.2d 267 (1980) ).

An agency's decision to withhold agency records is not improper if it has not "receive[d] a request that ‘reasonably describes such records.’ " Evans v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 951 F.3d 578, 583 (D.C. Cir. 2020) (quoting 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(3)(A) ). "[A FOIA] request ‘reasonably describes’ agency records when it ‘would be sufficient to enable a professional employee of the agency who was familiar with the subject area of the request to locate the record with a reasonable amount of effort.’ " Am. Ctr. for L. & Just. v. U.S. Dep't of Homeland Sec., Case No. 1:21-cv-01364 (TNM), 573 F.Supp.3d 78, 81 (D.D.C. Nov. 10, 2021) (alteration omitted) (quoting Truitt v. Dep't of State, 897 F.2d 540, 545 n.36 (D.C. Cir. 1990) ). "The linchpin inquiry is whether ‘the agency is able to determine precisely what records are being requested,’ " Dale v. IRS, 238 F. Supp. 2d 99, 104 (D.D.C. 2002) (quoting Tax Analysts v. IRS, 117 F.3d 607, 610 (D.C. Cir. 1997) )—"[b]road, sweeping requests lacking specificity are not sufficient," id. And although "FOIA cases typically and appropriately are decided on motions for summary judgment," Citizens for Resp. & Ethics in Wash. ("CREW") v. U.S. Postal Serv., 557 F.Supp.3d 145, 151 (D.D.C. 2021) (citation omitted), a motion under Rule 12(b)(6) is the appropriate vehicle for determining whether a plaintiff's request reasonably describes the records sought, see CREW v. U.S. Dep't of Just., 922 F.3d 480, 487–88 (D.C. Cir. 2019) ("[T]o plead a plausible claim that an agency has ‘improperly’ withheld its records, we require a plaintiff ... to allege that it made a procedurally compliant request.").³

Analysis

The FBI moves to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint as to Requests 1, 2, and 3. The FBI contends, as it did in its initial denials, that these requests "fail to reasonably describe the records they seek or seek to impose unreasonable burdens on the FBI," and thus that the FBI has no obligation to comply under FOIA. Def.’s Mot. at 4. This overarching argument has a different flavor for each request, so, following the parties’ lead, the Court will address each request in turn. For the reasons explained below, the Court will grant the government's motion to dismiss as to Requests 1 and 3 but deny it as to Request 2.

I. Request 1

Plaintiffs’ first request seeks "records of all communications between the FBI and" the Governor, Lieutenant Governor,...