Peter Pototsky v. Department of Homeland Securit

Good Law
368 F. App'x 832
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 3, 201009-15247California338 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Peter Pototsky appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment for the Department of Homeland Security in his action under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 , et seq. (“FOIA”) and the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552a, et seq. (“Privacy Act”), seeking redacted material and relief in connection with an encounter Pototsky, an airplane pilot, had with employees of the United States Customs and Border Patrol. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for clear error the district court’s findings of fact, and de novo its conclusions of law regarding the applicability of a FOIA exemption. Lane v. Dep’t of Interior, 523 F.3d 1128, 1135 (9th Cir.2008). We affirm.

The district court did not clearly err by concluding Exemption 7 applies. The redacted material “could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy” and “would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions.” 5 U.S.C. § 552 (b)(7), (C) and (E); Fiduccia v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 185 F.3d 1035, 1047-48 (9th Cir.1999) (affirming summary judgment under Exemption 7(C) even though the individuals’ names had already…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.