Grigsby v. U.S. Dept of Justice

Background

Calvin B. Grigsby sued the United States Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), seeking expedited processing of his request for FBI records referring to him. His request covered records from January 1, 1985, through January 1, 2021, including FBI interview reports. Grigsby said the records concerned indictments from 1996 that he believed were based on falsified accounting records and testimony. He also stated that he was trying to have the indictments set aside and that he was 75 years old.

The FBI denied expedited processing in November 2021, stating that Grigsby had not provided enough information to meet the requirements for expedited treatment. The FBI also notified him that unusual circumstances applied, including the need to search separate offices, examine a large number of records, and consult with another agency or Department of Justice component. The FBI later identified approximately 7,500 potentially responsive pages and placed the request in its extra-large processing track. After Grigsby filed this lawsuit, the request was assigned to an analyst for standard processing. The FBI reported that it had reviewed 252 pages, released 135 pages, and sent 114 pages to other agencies for review.

Motion and Legal Standard

Grigsby filed a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56, which governs summary judgment, asking for expedited processing. Summary judgment may be granted when there is no genuine dispute about a material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment under the law.

FOIA generally requires agencies to process requests in the order received. It also requires agencies to provide expedited processing when the requester shows a compelling need. The Department of Justice regulations identify four relevant circumstances: an imminent threat to a person’s life or physical safety; urgency to inform the public about government activity when the requester primarily disseminates information; loss of substantial due-process rights; or widespread and exceptional media interest involving possible questions about government integrity that affect public confidence.

Court’s Analysis

The court rejected Grigsby’s argument that the FBI failed to meet FOIA’s response deadline. The court treated November 8, 2021—the date the FBI received the additional information it had requested—as the triggering date. The FBI’s November 18, 2021 letters therefore fell within the applicable deadline. The court also found that the FBI’s notice adequately identified the unusual circumstances and informed Grigsby that he could narrow his request, contact the FBI’s FOIA public liaison, or seek dispute-resolution services.

The court further held that an allegedly improper response to a FOIA request is not itself a basis for expedited processing. Grigsby had not provided evidence showing that the FBI’s identified unusual circumstances did not apply. The court found that his request for all FBI records referring to him over a 36-year period could reasonably involve a large number of separate records, particularly because the FBI had identified more than 7,500 potentially responsive documents.

The court also considered Grigsby’s claimed compelling needs. It found no evidence that he was currently experiencing a loss of substantial due-process rights. The court likewise found that the older news articles Grigsby submitted did not establish current widespread and exceptional media interest of the type required by the regulation. The court noted that most of the articles dated from 1986 to 1999, with one dated 2014. Because Grigsby did not establish a qualifying compelling need, the court did not find the FBI’s denial of expedited processing improper.

Disposition

The court denied Grigsby’s motion for expedited processing. The opinion did not order the FBI to accelerate the request’s processing.