Carol Van Strum v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Carol Van Strum v. United States Environmental Protection Agency

972 F.2d 1348 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Carol Van STRUM, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Defendant-Appellee. Carol Van STRUM, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Defendant-Appellee. Nos. 91-35404, 91-35577. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted July 6, 1992. Decided Aug. 17, 1992. Before GOODWIN, TANG and DAVID R. THOMPSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Van Strum appeals the judgment after a bench trial in favor of the Environmental Protection Agency in her suit challenging the EPA's response to her Freedom of Information Act request for documents relating to dioxin. We must determine whether the trial court had an adequate factual basis for its decision and, if so, whether that decision was clearly erroneous. National Wildlife Fed'n v. United States Forest Serv., 861 F.2d 1114, 1116 (9th Cir.1988). We affirm. 1. Construction of the first request…