Two cases, different plaintiffs, different agency declarants. However, both of these FOIA cases brought against the Executive Office for the United States Attorneys yield the same results--summary judgment is not appropriate on the agency's search for responsive records.
In the first case brought by a pro se prisoner, Judge Henry H. Kennedy, Jr. of the District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the EOUSA description of its search was inappropriate because the declaration of the EOUSA attorney was "devoid of any evidence about the search." Ouch.
In the second case, Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly also of the District Court for the District of Columbia takes the EOUSA to task for failing to search for certain records specifically named in the plaintiff's brief, which was the basis for the search in the first instance. This case is also interesting in that the EOUSA backtracks away from statements made in a previously filed declaration and basically tells the Court its prior statements just weren't true. Double Ouch.
Conducting a FOIA search is relatively straightforward. Agencies use whatever computerized records systems they have and search using key words such as the requesters name and case number. If the agency knows what personnel worked on a matter, they can task them with searching their files for documents. And once a search is completed, the declaration is relatively easy. It is just the story of the search. Hopefully, the EOUSA can figure out how to search for records and describe the search in the near future.
