Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Juan Carlos Ocasio, Appellant v. United States Department of Justice, Appellee
Juan Carlos Ocasio, Appellant v. Merit Systems Protection Board, Appellee
ORDER
Upon consideration of the motion for summary affirmance in No. 17-5005, the opposition thereto, and the reply; the motion to consolidate and the opposition thereto; and this court's May 9, 2017, order in No. 17-5085, it is
ORDERED that the motion for summary affirmance in No. 17-5005 be granted. The merits of the parties' positions are so clear as to warrant summary action. See Taxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (per curiam). Appellant challenges the government's withholding under Freedom of Information Act Exemption 7(C), 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(C), documents that are part of a Federal Bureau of Investigation investigative file of a private citizen. To the extent appellant asserts a public interest in disclosure, such interest is outweighed by the substantial privacy interests in this investigative file. See Shrecker v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 349 F.3d 657, 666 (D.C. Cir. 2003). The government's declaration and Vaughn index provided sufficient justification for withholding the documents in their entirety. See Mead Data Central, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Air Force, 566 F.2d 242, 260-61 (D.C. Cir. 1977) (permitting documents to be withheld in their entirety when nonexempt portions “are inextricably intertwined with exempt portions”). It is
FURTHER ORDERED, on the court's own motion, that No. 17-5085 be dismissed for lack of prosecution. See D.C. Cir. Rule 38. By order issued May 9, 2017, appellant was ordered to either pay the filing and docketing fees or file in this court a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis by June 8, 2017. To date, appellant has not done so, despite this court's May 9, 2017, order warning him that failure to do so would result in dismissal of the case. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to consolidate be dismissed as moot.
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R. App. P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.
Per Curiam
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 17-5005, No. 17-5085
Decided: August 23, 2017
Court: United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)